Amicus: A Law Review

The Supreme Court, Voting Rights, and the Future of American Elections

James Santelle — Thu, 06 Aug 2026 10:57:28 +0000

In the final installment of his four-part series on the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2025–2026 term, Jim Santelle examines the Court’s most consequential rulings on elections and voting rights. He recaps key statistics from the term before diving into major decisions involving mail-in ballots, campaign finance, and the landmark Louisiana v. Callais ruling, which reshapes how race can be considered in congressional redistricting. Santelle explains how the decision builds on earlier Voting Rights Act cases, explores its nationwide impact on gerrymandering and future elections, and discusses what these changes could mean for voters heading into the 2026 midterms and beyond. The episode concludes the Court review series before Amicus: A Law Review returns to its weekly analysis of current legal and constitutional issues.

The Supreme Court, the Second Amendment, and the Future of Gun Rights

James Santelle — Mon, 20 Jul 2026 17:43:33 +0000

In this episode of Amicus: A Law Review, host Jim Santelle continues his summer series examining the most significant U.S. Supreme Court decisions from the 2025–2026 term. This week, the focus turns to the Second Amendment and the evolving constitutional landscape surrounding gun rights in America. Drawing from landmark cases such as District of Columbia v. Heller and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, Jim explains how the Court’s interpretation of the right to keep and bear arms has changed over time and how those decisions continue to shape modern firearms law.

The episode also explores the Court’s newest rulings involving firearm possession by marijuana users, concealed carry restrictions on private property, domestic violence restraining orders, and regulations on ghost guns. Jim breaks down what these decisions mean for gun owners, lawmakers, and the courts while previewing a major case the Supreme Court will hear next term on state bans of semiautomatic rifles. Whether you’re interested in constitutional law, public policy, or the future of the Second Amendment, this episode provides the historical context and legal analysis needed to understand one of the nation’s most debated constitutional rights.

Judges, Justice, and the Rule of Law

James Santelle — Sat, 04 Jul 2026 16:00:00 +0000

Federal district court judges are making waves! Jim Santelle dissects Judge Dudek’s fiery rebuke of the DOJ’s mishandling of an immigrant’s right to due process, leading to the detainee’s release. Judge Sorokin’s takedown of a $100,000 visa fee for skilled workers as an illegal tax showcases judicial pushback against executive overreach. Judge Bosberg denies DOJ’s request to erase a ruling that exposed their harassment of Jerome Powell. Meanwhile, the Kennedy Center removes Trump’s name, sparking legal and financial fallout. The Supreme Court faces pivotal cases on gun rights, immigration, and presidential power. Justice is alive and kicking!

Judicial Fireworks: Courts vs. Executive Overreach

James Santelle — Sat, 13 Jun 2026 16:00:00 +0000

In a captivating two-hour finale of Amicus, Jim Santelle dissects the judicial pulse of America, spotlighting federal district courts as bulwarks against executive overreach. From Judge Brinkma’s demand for clarity on a controversial anti-weaponization fund to Judge Kelly’s stand against historical censorship in national parks, judges are calling the shots. Santelle scrutinizes pivotal Supreme Court cases on gun rights, deportation, and presidential powers, amidst a looming 23-case backlog. As the show transitions from live to digital, Santelle champions civic engagement, ensuring justice remains a collective endeavor. Stay tuned for more legal enlightenment!

Gavel to Gavel: Supreme Court Showdowns and Legal Tangles

James Santelle — Sat, 06 Jun 2026 16:00:00 +0000

The Supreme Court is in high gear, clearing Alabama to redraw its congressional map, slashing a majority-black district, signaling a restrictive future for voting rights. Regulatory bodies like the SEC and FCC score major wins, affirming their enforcement powers. Meanwhile, the President’s grand ballroom plans hit a skeptical appeals court. Federal district courts are busy, too—halting Trump’s asylum restrictions and SNAP fund conditions. In criminal news, John Bolton prepares to plead guilty over classified info, while James Comey’s bizarre prosecution over seashells sees a lead prosecutor bowing out. Lastly, the SPLC faces renewed legal fire but strikes back with claims of prosecutorial misconduct.

Justice Unleashed: Courts Take on Presidential Overreach

James Santelle — Sat, 30 May 2026 16:00:00 +0000

This episode dives into the legal chaos surrounding President Trump’s controversial $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund, halted by a federal judge for potential constitutional breaches. Jim Santelle explores the fallout from this fund, including its questionable legality and the reopening of a dismissed $10 billion lawsuit involving Trump’s tax records. Also on the docket: the DOJ’s dubious criminal probe into E. Jean Carroll, raising alarms of retaliatory justice. Meanwhile, in Chicago, prosecutorial misconduct leads to dropped charges against protesters, as a judge slams the DOJ’s grand jury manipulations. The Supreme Court rules to uphold racial fairness in jury selection and curtails free speech rights for immigration judges. The episode wraps with a federal judge’s directive to remove Trump’s name from the Kennedy Center, underscoring judicial resistance to executive overreach.

Weaponization Reimbursement Ruckus

James Santelle — Sat, 23 May 2026 16:00:00 +0000

Jim Santelle delves into the legal mayhem surrounding the establishment of a controversial $1.8 billion Weaponization Reimbursement Fund by the Trump administration. This unauthorized fund, allegedly compensating victims of ‘lawfare’ and government weaponization, raises eyebrows as it’s carved from the Judgment Fund, a congressional creation meant for litigation judgments. Santelle critiques the fund’s dubious legality, highlighting its potential misuse to benefit Trump allies, including January 6th insurrectionists. The episode also covers the Supreme Court’s cautious stance on death penalty cases involving intellectual disabilities and a case on Cuban property claims post-nationalization. Meanwhile, federal judges reject DOJ’s push for state voter rolls, marking a victory for state privacy laws.

Surprises in the Criminal Justice System

James Santelle — Sat, 16 May 2026 16:00:00 +0000

This episode dives into unexpected twists in criminal cases across America. Jim Santelle reviews the South Carolina Supreme Court’s reversal of Alex Murdoch’s murder convictions due to jury interference, a mistrial declared in Harvey Weinstein’s rape case in Manhattan, and the commutation of sentence for Colorado election denier Tina Peters. The podcast also covers a dropped fraud case against Indian billionaire Gautam Adani, raising ethical concerns. The episode transitions to civil matters, addressing the DOJ’s accusations against Yale for discriminatory admissions, an SEC settlement with Elon Musk, and a Supreme Court ruling on subpoena challenges.

Democracy's Redistricting Drama

James Santelle — Sat, 09 May 2026 16:00:00 +0000

This episode dives into recent legal battles shaping America’s political landscape. The Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana vs. Callais has ignited redistricting wars, allowing states like Tennessee to redraw congressional maps, potentially disenfranchising minority voters. Meanwhile, Virginia’s Supreme Court struck down a Democratic referendum on procedural grounds, highlighting the ongoing tug-of-war over partisan gerrymandering. In a legal twist, the Court of International Trade ruled against the president’s tariff attempts, questioning executive overreach. Abortion rights resurface as Mifepristone faces scrutiny, with the Supreme Court temporarily halting restrictions. Federal judges, from Manhattan to Rhode Island, are taking bold stands against executive actions, reinforcing constitutional boundaries and protecting civil liberties.

Supreme Court's Blow to Voting Rights: Callais Case Unpacked

James Santelle — Sat, 02 May 2026 16:00:00 +0000

Jim Santelle dives into the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in the Callais case, which reshapes the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Court’s ruling diminishes Section 2, demanding proof of intentional racial discrimination for gerrymandering claims, empowering states to redraw districts without federal oversight unless blatant racial bias is shown. Santelle reviews historical strides in voting rights, from the 1960s civil rights movement to recent court cases like Shelby County and Bernovich, underscoring how the decision opens doors for partisan gerrymandering. The episode explores the potential political scramble across states and the legislative fixes Congress could enact to restore voter protections.

Justice in the Crosshairs: Probes, Prosecutions, and Politics

James Santelle — Sat, 25 Apr 2026 16:00:00 +0000

Host Jim Santelle delves into the tumultuous world of justice and politics, dissecting investigations of political figures like John Brennan and Jerome Powell, which raise eyebrows for their seemingly partisan motives. Santelle critiques the Department of Justice’s handling and misuse of subpoenas, highlighting the troubling trend of investigations serving as punishment. The episode shifts focus to legitimate prosecutions like the gun supplier in the Shreveport shooting and singer David Burke’s (d4vd) murder charges, underscoring the role of deterrence. Santelle also tackles DOJ’s controversial denaturalization moves and the revival of the death penalty, while Supreme Court cases on environmental and LGBTQIA rights add further complexity to the justice landscape.

Legal Battles and Rule of Law: From Oil Giants to Supreme Court Showdowns

James Santelle — Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:00:00 +0000

This episode of Amicus dives into pivotal legal happenings shaping America and beyond. The U.S. Supreme Court rules in favor of oil companies, allowing them to move environmental lawsuits from state to federal courts, spotlighting corporate influence in environmental justice. Meanwhile, a New York jury brands Live Nation a monopoly, igniting antitrust debates. Abroad, a French court finds cement giant Lafarge guilty of financing terrorism, a landmark ruling on corporate responsibility. Back home, federal judges block Trump’s White House ballroom plans and dismiss his defamation suit against the Wall Street Journal, highlighting judiciary checks on presidential actions. Plus, tensions flare at the Supreme Court as Justice Sotomayor apologizes for critiquing Justice Kavanaugh.

Justice Jitters: Todd Blanche's DOJ Debut

James Santelle — Sat, 11 Apr 2026 16:00:00 +0000

Todd Blanche steps into his role as Acting Attorney General amidst a storm of controversies and policy shifts. Asserting DOJ’s allegiance to President Trump, Blanche inherits a slew of legal quagmires, including the politically charged investigation into Cassidy Hutchinson and the rescission of civil rights settlements for transgender students. The DOJ’s credibility takes a hit with repeated court misrepresentations, while federal judges push back against executive overreach, from immigration crackdowns to media muzzling. Meanwhile, the NFL faces scrutiny under antitrust laws, and former Trump aide Steve Bannon’s conviction faces a potential reversal.

Justice Department Shakeup and ICE Detainments

James Santelle — Sat, 04 Apr 2026 16:00:00 +0000

The U.S. Supreme Court took center stage this week, striking down Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy, citing free speech concerns, while skepticism loomed large over President Trump’s executive order limiting birthright citizenship. Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized that the Constitution remains unchanged despite modern issues like birth tourism. Simultaneously, drama unfolded at the Department of Justice as Attorney General Pam Bondi was ousted, with Todd Blanche stepping in as acting AG. Back in Wisconsin, ICE detained the president of the state’s largest mosque, igniting debates on immigration policy and civil liberties. Legal and political battles rage on.

Courtroom Dramas: Tech Giants on Trial and Election Day Dilemmas

James Santelle — Sat, 28 Mar 2026 16:00:00 +0000

The episode dives into a whirlwind of legal battles and courtroom decisions. A California jury holds Meta and YouTube liable for harming a young user with addictive features, marking a landmark case in tech liability. Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rules that Cox Communications isn’t responsible for piracy by its users, raising questions on internet providers’ roles. The Wisconsin Supreme Court mandates Miranda rights for students interrogated at school, shedding light on minors’ rights. A pivotal case looms at the U.S. Supreme Court, potentially reshaping how late ballots are counted, challenging the definition of Election Day.

Guardrails of Justice: Courts, Voting, and the Constitution

James Santelle — Sat, 21 Mar 2026 16:00:00 +0000

In this episode, Jim Santelle tackles the crucial role of federal district courts in upholding the rule of law, highlighting recent cases where judges blocked Trump administration actions on vaccines, press restrictions, and governance at the Kennedy Center. The episode also delves into Trump’s lawsuit against Harvard and a civil suit by former FBI agents alleging political retribution. Supreme Court cases on birthright citizenship and election laws are on the horizon.

Special guest Kristin Hansen from Blue Sky Waukesha joins to discuss Wisconsin’s upcoming elections, the importance of informed voting, and the potential threat posed by the SAVE Act.

Guests: Kristin Hansen

Subpoenas, Scandals, and Supreme Court Sagacity

James Santelle — Sat, 14 Mar 2026 16:00:00 +0000

Jim Santelle dives into the tumultuous legal landscape, spotlighting grand jury subpoenas and their pivotal role in DOJ investigations. Highlighting figures like Jerome Powell and Letitia James, he scrutinizes politically charged probes deemed baseless by federal judges. The episode unravels the chaos surrounding 120-day interim U.S. Attorney appointments and their legal pitfalls. Santelle critiques the DOJ’s controversial attempts to usurp state bar oversight, and the unsettling ‘friendly adversaries’ tactic reshaping state laws without legislative input. The Supreme Court’s shadow docket debate, featuring Justices Kavanaugh and Jackson, ties into plummeting public confidence in the Court’s integrity.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, BlueSky, YouTube, X, and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

The Courts in Crisis: Guns, Maps, and Misconduct

James Santelle — Sat, 07 Mar 2026 17:00:00 +0000

This episode of Amicus dives into the tumultuous state of the U.S. judicial and legal systems, highlighting recent Supreme Court actions and lower court controversies. It covers the Supreme Court’s handling of Second Amendment rights in the context of drug use, particularly marijuana, and its implications for gun ownership. The Court’s shadow docket decisions, including those affecting congressional maps and transgender student policies, reveal its growing influence over state and federal issues. The episode also discusses explosive courtroom clashes, such as Minnesota and New Jersey judges threatening contempt against federal agencies for non-compliance, and the Department of Justice’s internal struggles with lawyer misconduct and political entanglement.

Supreme Court Drama: Takings, Post Office, and Deportation Dilemmas

James Santelle — Sat, 28 Feb 2026 17:00:00 +0000

Dive into a whirlwind of legal intrigue with Jim Santelle as he navigates the latest from the U.S. Supreme Court and beyond. The high court tackles the Takings Clause in Pung v. Isabella County, questions the Postal Service’s immunity in Conan, and examines courtroom tactics in Villarreal v. Texas. Meanwhile, Judge Brian Murphy slams Trump’s ‘third-country’ deportations in Massachusetts, while Judge Eileen Cannon stirs controversy in Florida over Jack Smith’s report on Trump’s classified docs. Add in FBI raids in California and DOJ’s Epstein file missteps, and you’ve got a legal storm worth dissecting!

Supreme Court Smacks Down Tariff Tango

James Santelle — Sat, 21 Feb 2026 17:00:00 +0000

The Supreme Court delivers a major blow to presidential powers, ruling 6-3 against Trump’s sweeping tariffs on imports, citing constitutional overreach. The court’s decision emphasizes Congress’s role in taxation, with Neil Gorsuch extolling legislative process virtues. Trump lashes out at the justices, calling them ‘fools’ and ‘lap dogs,’ highlighting a growing tension between branches. Meanwhile, cases like birthright citizenship and election laws loom large on the court’s docket. Internationally, South Korea’s ex-president receives a life sentence for insurrection, and France’s Giselle Pelicote inspires with her fight against sexual violence. A First Amendment win in Wisconsin reminds us of the enduring power of free speech.

Pam Bondi's Capitol Hill Calamity

James Santelle — Sun, 15 Feb 2026 01:00:00 +0000

In a chaotic congressional hearing, Attorney General Pam Bondi faced intense scrutiny and criticism for her unprofessional demeanor and evasive answers before the House Judiciary Committee. Her testimony, marked by confrontations with US Representatives like Jamie Raskin and Ted Lieu, highlighted issues of competence and decorum. Despite the focus on the Epstein case and allegations of Department of Justice politicization, Bondi’s performance was criticized for lacking transparency, compassion, and basic legal skills. Meanwhile, federal courts showed resilience, with judges upholding constitutional safeguards and rejecting the administration’s overreach in several cases. Public advocacy and engagement remain vital amid these challenges.

Justice on the Ropes: Courts vs. Chaos

James Santelle — Sat, 07 Feb 2026 17:00:00 +0000

Jim Santelle delivers a fiery review of the week’s legal battles, spotlighting the chaos within the Department of Justice and the federal courts’ role in upholding the rule of law. The Supreme Court’s stance on gerrymandering in Texas and California reveals partisan maneuverings, while federal judges tackle cases ranging from ICE detentions to climate change law violations. The DOJ faces scrutiny for incompetence, with insiders like Ed Martin under fire. Notably, a judge orders the release of detained immigrants, invoking the Declaration of Independence to critique government overreach. Amidst it all, the judiciary remains a bulwark against executive excesses.

A Judicial Showdown In Minneapolis

James Santelle — Sat, 31 Jan 2026 17:00:00 +0000

Host Jim Santelle delves into the legal turmoil enveloping Minneapolis. The U.S. Department of Justice, under Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, reverses its stance to investigate the murder of Alex Pretti by ICE agents, igniting debates on civil rights and federal overreach. Chief Judge Patrick Schultz lambasts the DOJ for its unprecedented move to overturn a magistrate’s decision on arrest warrants, spotlighting judicial defiance against executive misconduct. Meanwhile, Judge Katherine Menendez grapples with the legality of the Trump administration’s Operation Metro Surge, questioning ulterior motives amid allegations of political retribution. As the federal courts drown in cases, the episode highlights the judiciary’s role as the last bastion of constitutional integrity.

Supreme Court Showdowns and First Amendment Fires

James Santelle — Sat, 24 Jan 2026 17:00:00 +0000

Amicus dives into two Supreme Court oral arguments: a Second Amendment case from Hawaii challenging property rights versus gun rights, and a high-stakes battle over presidential powers to dismiss Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. The Court seems poised to uphold property rights and protect Federal Reserve independence, signaling skepticism towards Trump’s attempts to fire Cook without clear cause. Meanwhile, special counsel Jack Smith defends his prosecutions of Donald Trump, asserting evidence of criminality despite political backlash. In First Amendment news, a federal judge halts FBI access to materials seized from a Washington Post reporter, raising constitutional concerns over press freedom.

Judicial Showdowns and Transgender Sports Debate

James Santelle — Sat, 17 Jan 2026 17:00:00 +0000

This week’s legal landscape is a whirlwind of judicial power and constitutional debates. In Minneapolis, a federal judge clamps down on ICE agents’ overreach, stirring lawsuits and resignations as the DOJ eyes criminal probes against local leaders. The Insurrection Act rears its head, only for Trump to backtrack amid backlash. Meanwhile, in Virginia, turmoil ensues over a U.S. attorney’s legitimacy, leading to a prosecutor’s firing. All eyes are on the Supreme Court as it grapples with the contentious issue of transgender athletes in women’s sports, hinting at support for state bans, with implications rippling nationwide.

Legal Showdowns: Venezuela Crisis and Minneapolis Tragedy

James Santelle — Sat, 10 Jan 2026 17:00:00 +0000

Host Jim Santelle dives into the legal maelstrom sparked by the U.S. apprehension of Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro, dissecting international law and presidential power. The episode scrutinizes America’s controversial military role in Venezuela, echoing past actions in Panama. Shifting gears, it explores the tragic ICE shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis, examining constitutional standards for law enforcement’s use of force. Amidst public outcry and federal oversight controversies, Santelle unpacks legal doctrines and potential remedies. The episode also touches on Supreme Court activities and decisions affecting federal policies and landmark cases.

Bombing Venezuela And The Definition Of An Occupation

James Santelle — Sat, 03 Jan 2026 17:00:00 +0000

In the early hours of Saturday, January 3, the US military conducted bombings on Caracos, Venezuela with their current President, Nicolás Maduro along with his wife being captured and brought to The United States. James breaks down the events, as well as their legal ramifications. Along with this breaking story, James also gives an overview of other major stories coming out of the world of law.

James breaks down the timeline of the events from today, as well as the aftermath including commentary from members of Trump Administration and Congress, He also talks about the justifications used by The White House for capturing the Venezuelan President, bringing him to this country. Jim discusses the implications on American and International law.

In other major news, James discusses news regarding the National Guard troops in major cities and a shocking announcement from President Trump about troop placement in three major cities.

In the second hour, James discusses the year end report from The Chief Justice of The United States Supreme Court. He gives a history of this yearly release and what some feel are missing in this document. We also hear from President Trump regarding the attacks on Venezuela, indicating that The United States will “Run The Country” until further notice, which Jim says is the definition of an occupation. He then wraps up the show talking about the explosive deposition of Jack Smith.

Judicial Jams and Legal Landmines: Year-End Wrap-Up

James Santelle — Sat, 27 Dec 2025 17:00:00 +0000

Jim Santelle delves into a whirlwind of judicial decisions and looming legal battles as 2025 closes. He critiques the prosecutorial discretion in Wisconsin Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan’s conviction and explores the intricacies of prosecutorial decision-making. The episode highlights a dramatic Supreme Court ruling barring Trump from deploying the National Guard in Chicago, emphasizing constraints on executive power. Santelle underscores the incompetence of the Department of Justice in handling deportations, spotlighting Judge Bosberg’s insistence on due process for Venezuelans. Finally, Santelle highlights various federal court rulings, from FEMA funding to mental health grants and gender care, painting a vivid picture of the American legal landscape.

The Curious Case Of Judge Dugan: What's Next?

James Santelle — Sat, 20 Dec 2025 17:00:00 +0000

Jim starts the show with his opening statement, a review of everything he will be covering on today’s episode, including the verdict in the case against Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan. He also discusses his thoughts on the impact of criminal prosecution and the ability to hold two opinions on the same topic.

In the matter of Judge Dugan, Jim talks about the word “deterrence” and its use in the courtroom, as well as a refresher on the First Amendment, specifically what it does and does not protect. He then reviews the highlights of the trial including who was called to the stand as well as thoughts from the presiding judge.

What happens next after the Dugan verdict? Jim goes into the necessary steps and what a judge can do utilizing case law from a tragic event in the history of Hip Hop (RIP Jam Master Jay). The question of “Can Governor Evers commute her sentence?” and Jim goes over the answer to that inquiry. When it comes to what the sentence could be, we get a preview of that process and how much power the judge has in the matter.

Jim wraps up the overview of Judge Dugan’s case with some of his personal thoughts on the matter and reminds us that while our justice system seems imperfect at times, we have the opportunities to make it better. He then gives a brief rundown of what The US Supreme Court is reviewing and how two cases have roots right here in Wisconsin.

Supreme Showdowns: Power, Politics, and Penalties

James Santelle — Sat, 13 Dec 2025 17:00:00 +0000

This episode dives into the Supreme Court’s latest oral arguments, tackling presidential powers, campaign finance, and the death penalty. First, the court considers overturning a 90-year precedent that limits presidential authority to fire members of independent agencies, potentially granting unprecedented executive power.

Next, campaign finance rules are questioned, as the GOP challenges limits on party contributions to candidates, a decision with major implications for the 2026 elections.

Finally, a death penalty case from Alabama tests the court’s stance on mental disability assessments. Meanwhile, lower court judges scrutinize DOJ’s handling of controversial deportations, highlighting ongoing legal battles for justice.

Pardons, Power, and the Supreme Court: Navigating Justice's Maze

James Santelle — Sat, 06 Dec 2025 17:00:00 +0000

This episode delves into the labyrinth of justice, exploring the unchecked power of presidential pardons and their implications. Jim Santelle scrutinizes recent controversial pardons, including that of Juan Orlando Hernandez, convicted for massive drug trafficking, juxtaposed against the U.S. military’s aggressive actions against alleged drug-running Venezuelan boats. Jim also dissects major Supreme Court actions, including the acceptance of a case on birthright citizenship and a pivotal decision on Texas’s racial gerrymandering, both revealing the Court’s trajectory on crucial rule of law issues. The grand jury’s independence is highlighted with its refusal to re-indict Letitia James, showcasing democracy’s checks and balances.

Judicial Fireworks: Legal Dismissals and Gerrymandering Showdowns

James Santelle — Sat, 29 Nov 2025 17:00:00 +0000

This week’s legal landscape is ablaze with a federal judge dismissing major prosecutions against James Comey and Letitia James due to improper U.S. attorney appointments, sparking chaos in Virginia’s U.S. attorney’s office and a promised appeal. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court stirs the pot with a Texas gerrymandering case, as Justice Alito suspends a ruling against racially biased district maps, setting the stage for another landmark decision. Elsewhere, North Carolina’s partisan map survives judicial scrutiny, while Trump faces civil setbacks with the Eleventh Circuit upholding sanctions in frivolous lawsuits against CNN and others.

The US Department Of Justice: An Internal Clown Car

James Santelle — Sat, 22 Nov 2025 17:00:00 +0000

In the immediate aftermath of what had to be among the most stunning series of revelations of the incompetence, the depravity, the recklessness, and the hubris of the Justice Department, this week’s installment of “Amicus: A Law Review” focuses dramatic attention on three hearings in the conduct of the prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey: Beginning with a reminder of the gobsmacking question posed by a federal judge about the legal authority of Eastern Virginia United States Attorney Lindsay Halligan to initiate and prosecute the case at all.

Then, we review in detail the even more shocking revelations in the courtrooms of a federal magistrate judge and a trial court judge–not only confirming wild misstatements of the law by the prosecutor to the indicting grand jury but also reflecting the breach of the attorney-client relationship in the disclosure by an investigating agent of material information before that same reviewing body. As if that isn’t enough, the broadcast also includes explanations of just why these legal errors, procedural bunglings, and constitutional gaffes (including an admission that the full grand jury never saw the final charging document) now mandate the outright dismissal of the case–with prejudice.

Attention to the internal “clown car” that IS the Justice Department (from which some 5500 employees have departed in the past 10 months) continues with reporting on the curious but likely well-founded internal investigation of exactly what two senior aides have been up to in attempting (unsuccessfully) to gin up mortgage fraud-related and other criminal cases against more of the President’s self-identified adversaries, including New York Attorney General Letitia James—and California Senator Adam Schiff. Finally in this category of prosecution reviews, the broadcast updates listeners on the status of the third of these cases, charging former National Security Advisory John Bolton if disclosing classified and secret information.

In the open file of other past and unmistakable violations of the law by this Administration, the broadcast then offers the latest insight into the continuing attention of a District of Columbia judge committed to the pursuit of truth in connection with that overtly unconstitutional transport of some 238 migrants to El Salvador last Match–and on the parallel work of a Maryland judge still struggling to deliver justice for Kilmar Abrego Garcia as he moves in and among the civil immigration and criminal prosecution tendrils of a Homeland Security Department seemingly hellbent on deporting him to a foreign county.

Finally, we examine the excruciatingly painful and humanely troubling report of an Illinois judge who has chronicled–and condemned–the illegal actions and misconduct of federal law enforcement on the streets of Chicago in recent weeks, purportedly present to quell community unrest that never existed in the first place. And the broadcast concludes with the findings of still another judge who determined that the recent military deployments in our nation’s capital by the President are both factually unjustified and constitutionally invalid.

Supreme Court Showdown: Religion, Rights, and the Rule of Law

James Santelle — Sat, 15 Nov 2025 17:00:00 +0000

Welcome to the show and today’s episode dives deep into the whirlwind of recent Supreme Court activities. Host and Former US Attorney Jim Santelle dissects the Court’s decision conferences, highlighting the denial of Kim Davis’s appeal against same-sex marriage and a new case on Mississippi’s mail-in ballot law. The Court’s fascination with religion gets another spotlight in the Landor case, where Rastafarian dreadlocks meet prison policies. Katanji Brown Jackson’s strategic maneuvering in the SNAP funding saga reveals her tactical brilliance amid a government shutdown. Meanwhile, the Department of Justice grapples with internal chaos, including Maureen Comey’s lawsuit and the controversial prosecutions of James Comey and Letitia James.

Learning Resources v. Trump: A President Or A King?

James Santelle — Sat, 08 Nov 2025 17:00:00 +0000

The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week regarding whether or not the president has the power to levy tariffs, essentially sidestepping the power of The Congress and Article 1 of The US Constitution.

A majority of the show is dedicated to this very important case and we hear from John Sauer, the US Solicitor General, as well as the Justices. And in this matter where The Court has sided many times with President Trump, the questions being asked makes clear there is skepticism and the concern comes from unlikely figures on the bench, Jim also talks about what to expect post-argument and the possibility of a decision being reached as soon as this weekend, but issued in the coming months.

But its not just the one case, because Jim highlights other cases we should be aware of, including one that seeks to reverse marriage equality while another, now (because of the The Court’s Shadow Docket) makes it harder for Transgender folks to travel which also hampers their ability to exist.

Rounding out the show, Jim speaks on the decision from The Court, upholding the stay from the president regarding SNAP funds. He also talks “Injunction Function”, which is now his weekly overview of all of the judges in courts nationwide doing all they can to keep the White House seizing all power and rendering our Construction, moot.

The State of the Judiciary Amid The Federal Shutdown

James Santelle — Sat, 01 Nov 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Good morning and welcome to another edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. This week, federal courts were a battleground as judges confronted executive overreach, issuing injunctions to stop disruptive policies of the Trump Administration amid the federal government shutdown. In Rhode Island and Massachusetts, judges ordered the administration to release emergency SNAP funds, defying claims that reserves were untouchable.

And in Washington D.C., Jim takes a look at a case where a judge quashed a proof of citizenship mandate for voter registration. Meanwhile, in San Francisco, a court blocked mass federal employee firings, while Chicago’s streets saw judicial action against ICE brutality. With the Supreme Court poised to rule on presidential tariff authority, Jim outlines that the judiciary stands as a bulwark against authoritarianism, even as controversial cases against James Comey and Letitia James unravel.

A Closer Look at Presidential Authority

James Santelle — Sat, 25 Oct 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to another weekend edition of Amicus: A Law Review. This week, Jim Santelle unpacks a whirlwind of legal controversies surrounding presidential authority. He delves into high-profile prosecutions of Trump’s adversaries, James Comey, Letitia James, and John Bolton, highlighting motions for dismissal amid claims of vindictive prosecution. Jim scrutinizes Trump’s use of pardon power, notably commuting George Santos’s sentence and pardoning crypto mogul Changpeng Zhao, aka CZ.

The episode turns to the contentious deployment of National Guard troops in cities like Chicago and Portland, challenged in federal courts. Finally, Jim dissects U.S. military actions against Venezuelan boats, questioning their legality under constitutional and congressional war powers.

The Future of the Voting Rights Act in America

James Santelle — Sat, 18 Oct 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Good morning and welcome to another weekend edition of Amicus: A Law Review. On today’s episode, Jim Santelle dives deep into the potential dismantling of the Voting Rights Act as the Supreme Court weighs Louisiana v. Calais, a case that challenges Section II’s necessity in modern America. Justices Kavanaugh and Jackson spar over the Act’s relevance, with implications for the 2026 elections.

Meanwhile, federal courts push back against Trump’s National Guard deployments in Chicago and Portland, citing lack of evidence for insurrection claims. Judge Sarah Ellis admonishes ICE for aggressive tactics in Chicago, while Judge Susan Ilston halts politically motivated layoffs tied to the shutdown. Finally, John Bolton’s indictment raises questions of legitimacy amid political retribution concerns.

Indictments, Deployments and Fresh Dockets

James Santelle — Sat, 11 Oct 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to another weekend edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. On this edition, Jim dives into the week’s legal dramas, starting with the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, exploring allegations of vindictive prosecution under President Trump’s directives.

Then, Jim transitions to discuss the President’s controversial attempts to deploy the National Guard in cities like Portland and Chicago, sparking federal court battles over executive authority. And last but certainly not least, the Supreme Court’s new term is in full swing, tackling cases on conversion therapy bans and absentee ballot counting. The upcoming week promises more legal fireworks, including a pivotal Voting Rights Act challenge from Louisiana.

The Fall US Supreme Court Docket Is Here

James Santelle — Sat, 04 Oct 2025 16:00:00 +0000

To open the show up, Jim gives an overview on what we are going to talk about today. The Fall Docket of the US Supreme Court is starting next week and a little know decision from the 1930’s is coming back into the conversation and Jim will cover it all, as well as other topics. Jim gives an overview of something called “Humphrey’s Executor” and how it’s still vital and used today, but of course, it’s usefulness will be called into question by The Trump Administration. Then we work our way into the news of the James Comey indictment, as well as a controversary with another former FBI Director. Jim looks at how a Trump loyalist will put a man over the process and the concern of one US Senator In the second hour, we discuss the new docket of The US Supreme Court for 2025/2026. There are many cases to be reviewed by the Court and Jim highlights some of them for you today. He also tackles the story about Associate Justice Thomas giving his thoughts on the topic on one of the most aspects of the decision process of his and any court. Giving highlights on just some of the cases coming to The Court this week, Jim also talks about a judge who was just doing his job and now is facing backlash from The Supreme Court, as well as intimidation tactics because of his written opinion on immigration. And we bring the show to a close with Jim’s opinion on a government shutdown, as he has experience with one. He talks about the direct effects felt on us as the voters and what it means for the those who work in the federal government. To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, BlueSky, YouTube, X, and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

The Crumbling of Our Department of Justice

James Santelle — Sat, 27 Sep 2025 16:00:00 +0000

On this weekend’s special edition of “Amicus: A Law Review,” we will report on and address a wide variety of topics related to the government-shocking and justice-fracturing criminal indictment of former FBI Director James Comey: That extensive analysis will begin with explanations of the charges against him, the mechanisms that produced them, and what might reasonably follow in the weeks and months ahead—not only procedurally but also substantively, including reasonable expectations for the ultimate disposition of this unprecedented court case.

No less important, we’ll explain exactly what modern authoritarianism is all about, describe precisely how the Chief Executive has now assumed and exercised the powers of an authoritarian, examine the catastrophic implications of the Comey charges on the fundamental trappings of the Rule of Law (including the long-term implications for the future of the grand jury process), and expose the fundamental motivations of politically-animated criminal prosecutions–that is, not necessarily to accomplish convictions but to visit such harsh retribution on identified targets that the process itself becomes the retaliatory punishment.

Further down Pennsylvania Avenue at the crest of Capitol Hill, we’ll also explain the immediate and history-altering implications of the latest “shadow docket” order of the Supreme Court–on the surface permitting the White House (without any authority) to terminate the independent position of a Commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission but more sweepingly altering once again the checks and balances of our Republic in favor of an all-powerful presidency. Along the way, we’ll also explain why a case called “Humphrey’s Executor” now needs to enter the common lexicon of all Americans as the benchmark against which this tumultuous time in our history will forever be measured.

Because of the transcendent significance of these calamitous executive and judicial actions of the past week, listeners will be especially encouraged to ask issue-specific questions about exactly what is going on–and what exactly they might reasonable anticipate in the times ahead–by calling (855) 752-4842 or by texting those focused inquiries into the Civic Media on-line chat box.

Where are the Guardrails?

James Santelle — Sat, 20 Sep 2025 16:00:00 +0000

This weekend on Amicus: A Law Review, Jim Santelle dives into the turbulent news of American civics and constitutional integrity. At the Supreme Court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor decries the decline in civics education, warning of confusion between presidents and kings, while Trump proposes alarming expansions of presidential powers, including targeting ‘narco-terrorists.’

Plus, the administration’s crackdown on dissent riles philanthropies and media alike, with US Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and others pushing back. Amidst this, the US Department of Justice faces scrutiny for misrepresentations in court and retaliatory firings of FBI agents. As legal battles rage, federal judges stand as bulwarks against the erosion of constitutional norms.

Constitutional Questions: Rights, Limits, and the Supreme Court's Shadow

James Santelle — Sat, 13 Sep 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Good morning an thank you for joining another weekend edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. Following a week marked by tragic violence at Utah Valley University and Evergreen High School, the show takes a look at the First and Second Amendments’ scope and restrictions.

Jim Santelle then shares a critique of the Supreme Court’s shadow docket, highlighting rulings that alter law enforcement standards without explanation, sparking judicial disarray. These rulings, including a contentious decision on immigration detentions, reflect a broader pattern of opacity and procedural chaos that undermines the federal judiciary’s coherence.

In a look at legal news abroad, Santelle also discusses Jair Bolsonaro’s sentencing in Brazil and emphasizes the constitutional limits on speech and gun rights, urging legislative action to enhance public safety.

A New Docket, A New Book And An Old, Quixotic Mission

James Santelle — Sat, 06 Sep 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Your host, Jim Santelle gets right into the moment with so much news happening in the world of law. We discuss the new docket coming up for The Supreme Court starting this Fall and what we should expect. Next, a fully funded, mostly completed green energy project is being stopped for “security reasons”, but we know it’s because the Commander-In-Chief is swinging at windmills.

Then, Supreme Court Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett has a new book out and there a lot of questions, many of which aren’t being answered in its pages. Jim speaks to the history of her decision making process on the bench, including unlikely alliances.

Jim goes further into the upcoming docket which has a case that seeks to upend a landmark decision from just a decade ago. He also discusses some of the other high profile cases to be brought before the Court this year including one whose outcome will have huge impact on the fight for Transgender rights, as well as a case that deals with US voting rights. The latter is seen as the biggest case to be reviewed in this session.

To round out the show, Jim gives a quick overview on some of the important cases coming out of courts from around the country. He also takes your calls and reads your texts and we thank you for reaching out with your questions and comments.

Determining The Scope of Presidential Power

James Santelle — Sat, 30 Aug 2025 16:00:00 +0000

On this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review, Jim Santelle dives into a week of judicial fireworks as courts across America rebuke presidential actions. The Federal Circuit Court delivers a crushing blow to Trump’s sweeping tariffs, declaring them unconstitutional and beyond presidential power.

Meanwhile, the Ninth Circuit protects Venezuelan immigrants’ temporary status against executive overreach. District courts echo this sentiment, halting expedited deportations and preserving Voice of America’s leadership from executive dismissal. Along with that, a fiery ruling from Judge Thomas Cullen in Virginia dismisses the DOJ’s unprecedented lawsuit against Maryland’s judiciary, calling for respect among government branches.

Wrapping up the weekend, Jim previews the upcoming Supreme Court term, highlighting key cases on its docket and what listeners should keep in mind for the next term.

The Ghislaine Maxwell Interview: Reframing The Narrative

James Santelle — Sun, 24 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0000

In a fiery dissection of recent legal dramas, Jim Santelle navigates the stormy seas of politics entangled with law enforcement. The FBI’s raid on John Bolton’s home raises questions about the mix of retribution and legitimate investigation and the misuse of classified documents, as federal agents seek evidence of potential Espionage Act violations.

Meanwhile, the spectacle of Ghislaine Maxwell’s ‘interview’ with Deputy AG Todd Blanche reveals a theater of softball questions, as the Deputy Attorney General, Todd Blanche, yields no new revelations but paints a troubling picture of political favoritism. Maxwell praises Trump and minimizes her crimes, hinting at a pardon and as one listener said “Diminishes the severity of her actions in an attempt to reframe crimes to the public.”

Jim finishes the show with the New York Appeals Court, who threw out a massive fine against Trump, though civil fraud remains proven. And The Supreme Court delivers a convoluted ruling allowing Trump to cancel NIH grants, reflecting the chaotic state of U.S. jurisprudence.

A Siege Against the Rule of Law

James Santelle — Sat, 16 Aug 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Good morning and thank you for joining us for another weekend edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. This weekend’s syllabus includes a riveting discussion on the fraying rule of law, spotlighting unsettling trends in judicial and governmental actions.

Jim walks through instances of judges grappling with the Supreme Court’s shadow docket, leading to ‘malicious compliance’ and in some cases some differing and creative legal interpretations. The presumption of regularity is eroding as judges increasingly distrust government attorneys around the nation.

And in a closer look, Jim examines the controversial military presence in D.C., raising Fourth Amendment concerns, and the Unitary Executive Theory, promoted by more and more folks on the conservative end of the country’s political spectrum, further straining governmental credibility.

And Jim also touches on Appellate Courts delivering mixed judgments on key issues like transgender rights and DEI funding, setting the stage for a dramatic and uncertain Supreme Court term to come.

Judicial Tug-of-War: Defiance, Retribution, and the Rule of Law

James Santelle — Sat, 09 Aug 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to another weekend edition of Amicus: A Law Review. Jim Santelle guides you through a tumultuous landscape, federal judges are increasingly at odds with the Supreme Court, pushing back against executive orders on birthright citizenship, deportations, and arts funding cuts. This defiance, termed departmentalism, challenges the traditional presumption of regularity, as judges question the truthfulness of Justice Department lawyers.

Then the episode explores retribution under the second Trump Administration, targeting FBI officials, judges, and public figures like New York Attorney General Letitia James and now U.S. Senator Adam Schiff, threatening the stability of civil rights and institutional integrity. Amidst this judicial sparring, the public’s trust in the Department of Justice continues to erode.

Map Lines and Circuit Courts

James Santelle — Sat, 02 Aug 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to another weekend edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. What is happening in Texas? Jim dives into the incident surrounding redistricting and gerrymandering, with the southern state at the forefront of a rare, controversial mid-decade map redraw that could potentially shift political balances nationally. Plus, the Supreme Court’s involvement in a Louisiana redistricting case might reshape the Voting Rights Act entirely.

Meanwhile, President Trump’s sweeping tariff initiatives face skepticism from a Federal Circuit Court, questioning his constitutional authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. And on the citizenship front, the First and Ninth Circuits challenge Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship, reaffirming the century-old precedent. It’s a constantly shift legal field right now, with stretching of presidential powers and challenges to procedural norms.

International & National Legal Headlines to Round Out July

James Santelle — Sat, 26 Jul 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Jim Santelle, a former United States Attorney in Wisconsin and Justice Department official in Washington, is among Civic Media’s resident legal commentators and frequent on-air analysts. Join Jim each Saturday morning from 9 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. for “Amicus: A Law Review,” as current events meet civics understanding—through in-depth analysis and discussion (including your listener calls) of the most recent developments in the areas of law, government, courts, and the aspiration for justice.

On this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review, Jim highlights the World Court’s bold climate change ruling urging global responsibility and contrasts that to the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s controversial rollback on greenhouse gas policies.

Jim also takes a look at federal court rulings, notably the Kilmar Abrego Garcia deportation saga, spotlighting judicial pushback against government overreach. Th show discusses the Supreme Court’s use of the shadow docket, with recent decisions allowing the president to fire Consumer Product Safety Commission members and in a case involving challenges to the Voting Rights Act in North Dakota. Santelle also covers the ongoing Jeffrey Epstein saga, emphasizing Occam’s razor in understanding the convoluted case that has made its way back into the nation’s headlines.

The Shadow Docket and So Much More

James Santelle — Sat, 19 Jul 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to another weekend edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. Kicking off the show, Jim dives deep into the murky waters of the Supreme Court’s “shadow docket,” where emergency rulings sans explanations are reshaping American law.

Plus, with rampant firings at the Department of Justice, seasoned attorneys like Maureen Comey and ethics chief Joseph Terrell are ousted, reflecting Trump’s relentless grip on federal agencies. What do these departures mean for our legal system and listeners across the state?

In addition to that, the Jeffrey Epstein saga has been reignited in recent days with Trump’s dubious push to release grand jury transcripts, casting a shadow over the victims’ plight. Wrapping up the weekend, Jim discusses the courts tackling birthright citizenship, FTC terminations, ICC sanctions, and the rule of law hanging in the balance.

Another Whirlwind Week of Legal News

James Santelle — Sat, 12 Jul 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to another weekend edition of Amicus: A Law Review with your host Jim Santelle. Dive into the weekend’s whirlwind of legal drama with Santelle taking a closer looks as Wisconsin’s Supreme Court bolsters gubernatorial rulemaking, striking a blow against conversion therapy bans and redefining legislative power. It has been a busy week in the state when it comes to legal news.

Taking a look beyond Wisconsin, a federal judge in California clamped down on ICE racial profiling, demanding due process for detainees. And in New Hampshire, another judge pushes back against Trump’s birthright citizenship order, leveraging class action to skirt SCOTUS’s recent national injunction ban.

However, event with those set backs around the country, the U.S. Supreme Court greenlights Trump’s sweeping federal workforce cuts, controversy brews at the State Department and DOJ, where mass firings threaten America’s diplomatic and prosecutorial prowess. Let Jim Santelle walk you through all the legal news of the past seven days.

Presidential Powers, Legal Precedents & Privacy Rights

James Santelle — Sat, 05 Jul 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Thank you for joining us for another weekend edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. On this edition, the show dives into recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions reshaping the legal landscape. Jim discusses a pivotal ruling that ended national injunctions, limiting federal judges’ powers to issue broad orders, and therefore enhancing presidential authority. Controversially, parents can now opt out of LGBTQIA-themed school lessons, raising concerns about educational integrity.

On the more local level this week, the Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down the state’s 1849 abortion ban, emphasizing modern legislative intentions. The episode also covers Sean “Diddy” Combs’ partial acquittal on sex trafficking and Bryan Kohberger’s life sentence plea deal for murder. Amidst these judicial maneuvers, the Department of Justice eyes citizenship revocations and election oversight. A complex interplay of power and rights is in full discussion on Amicus: A Law Review.

The Final Rulings of the Supreme Court Term (Part 2)

James Santelle — Sun, 29 Jun 2025 21:00:00 +0000

The Supreme Court term has come to a close and we have a weekend with a bonus edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. In this second part of the weekend’s program, Jim takes a look at the whirlwind of legal drama as the Supreme Court tackles hot-button issues spanning free speech, religious liberty, and regulation.

Up first from Texas, the Court upholds the state’s age verification law for online adult content, sparking the next chapter of debate over First Amendment rights across the nation. Then in a Maryland case, parents win the right to opt their kids out of LGBTQ-themed school lessons on religious grounds, igniting concerns about educational censorship.

Meanwhile, the FCC triumphs in boosting broadband access for underserved communities, dodging the non-delegation doctrine this time around. As the U.S. Supreme Court wades through these complex cultural and constitutional waters, the decisions from the end of this term are redefining the American legal landscape.

The Final Rulings of the Supreme Court Term (Part 1)

James Santelle — Sat, 28 Jun 2025 16:00:00 +0000

The Supreme Court term has come to a close and we have a weekend with a bonus edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. Jim dives into the Supreme Court’s momentous ruling in Trump v. Casa, stripping federal courts of the power to issue nationwide injunctions against executive orders, marking a seismic shift in judicial checks on presidential power. Amy Coney Barrett’s majority opinion clashes fiercely with dissenters like Ketanji Brown Jackson, sparking fiery exchanges over judicial and executive boundaries.

This episode further dissects the decision’s broader implications, including potential patchwork legal landscapes and heightened presidential authority. Additional coverage includes a win for preventive care under the Affordable Care Act and the Court’s punt on a pivotal Louisiana redistricting case.

Where States Rights' Meet Equal Protection

James Santelle — Sat, 21 Jun 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to another edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. It has been a legal whirlwind of a week, and Jim Santelle breaks down a controversial week at the Supreme Court for you across the airwaves. The Justices upheld a Tennessee law banning medical treatments for transgender youth, sparking fierce debate on equal protection and states’ rights. Justice Roberts leaned on legislative deference, while Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent warned against abandoning judicial review.

Meanwhile, the court also navigated environmental jurisdiction in cases about nuclear waste and refinery exemptions, deciding which courts should tackle these thorny issues. As new cases loom on abortion clinic subpoenas and WWII oil production, the legal landscape is anything but settled, so be sure to tune in for next week’s edition of Amicus for more friendly break downs of the legal news of the week.

Amicus: Protests And A Tragedy In Minnesota

James Santelle — Sat, 14 Jun 2025 16:00:00 +0000

There is a jam packed show for you today. As always, your host, Jim Santelle kicks it off with a brief overview of our syllabus and gets right into the updates on what he calls “Injunction Function”. Judges are working overtime to stop the orders of the president and uphold the Constitution. He then takes time to review an opinion from N. California Judge Charles Breyer on the National Guard being deployed to The Golden State.

In the second hour; a decision on whether or not proof of citizenship is necessary while voted and the wide swath of decisions coming from The High Court and who is siding with who on the current cases being decided. Wrapping things up for this week, Jim speaks on breaking news out of Minnesota and discusses the protests taking place around the country.

A Return to the US and Privacy Concerns at the Social Security Administration

James Santelle — Sat, 07 Jun 2025 16:00:00 +0000

In a whirlwind of legal drama, Jim Santelle dissects the explosive return of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, deported without due process but now back under a federal indictment in Tennessee for alien smuggling. Santelle takes it to Attorney General Pam Bondi for her inflammatory rhetoric and neglecting the presumption of innocence, a core tenant of the American legal system.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court stirs controversy by granting Elon Musk’s team at DOGE access to sensitive Social Security data, ignoring privacy concerns raised by organizations. Unanimous rulings also emerge, including a rejection of Mexico’s lawsuit against U.S. gun makers, and a decision leveling the playing field in employment discrimination cases.

Guests: Jim Santelle

Of Immigration and Education

James Santelle — Sat, 31 May 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Good morning and welcome to another edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. To begin this episode, Jim dives into the latest legal battles and court rulings shaping American and international landscapes. Jim provides updates with what is changing with the judicial elections in Mexico and then Santelle critiques the Supreme Court’s shadow docket decisions, allowing the Trump administration to deport 500,000 immigrants, challenging humanitarian protections.

Kicking off the second hour of the program, Jim highlights Harvard University standing strong against the President’s attempts to block international students, with federal judges siding with academia. The show also brings attention to Secretary of State Marco Rubio targeting Chinese students, and threatening to revoke their visas.

Finally, the show shares this week’s “Injunction Function”, unraveling a hidden provision in the congressional spending bill that could strip judges of their power to enforce orders without imposing costly bonds, raising alarms about judicial independence and the rule of law.

High Court Decisions and Memorial Day Tributes

James Santelle — Sat, 24 May 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to a full syllabus on this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review. Jim runs down a recap of what habeas corpus is, and then dives into the week’s legal headlines.

This week, the Supreme Court delivered landmark rulings impacting immigration, religious freedom, and the power of the presidency. In a split decision, the Court allowed Oklahoma to use public funds for a religious charter school, spotlighting tensions in church-state separation.

The nation’s highest court shielded Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell from presidential firing while permitting removals at other federal agencies, hinting at a reshaped executive power. However, the justices also let the Trump administration lift protections for 350,000 Venezuelan immigrants, raising deportation stakes.

Meanwhile, district courts halted Trump’s orders dismantling the Department of Education and targeting Harvard’s international student enrollment, underscoring judicial checks on executive overreach. Jim ends the show with a tribute to Memorial Day reflections, highlighting sacrifices made for the constitutional principles discussed each and every weekend on Amicus: A Law Review with James Santelle.

Birthright Citizenship And The Curious Case Of Judge Dugan

James Santelle — Sat, 17 May 2025 16:00:00 +0000

In the first hour, Jim tackles the arguments happening in the US Supreme Court taking place as we pre-record this episode regarding Birthright Citizenship aka, the 14th Amendment. He also talks about the other case included which is taking on whether or not a judge in a single district, in a single court can pass an injunction which will be recognized nationwide. Jim looks at the chilling effects inside and outside the courtroom.

In the second hour, Jim is breaking down all of the salient details of the case against Milwaukee Judge Hannah Dugan. Judge Dugan was arrested a few weeks ago and as of the recording of today’s show has entered a plea of Not Guilty. Jim goes over the prosecution’s case, as well as the defense. Rounding out the show, Jim discusses the latest legal news from the world of The Menendez Brothers. We round out the show talking about the huge changes in the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department and what we mean by “Disparate Impact”.

Past Legacies and Current Controversies

James Santelle — Sat, 10 May 2025 16:00:00 +0000

In this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review, Jim Santelle explores the rich legacy of Justice David Souter, who defied expectations with his centrist approach on the Supreme Court, who passed away this week. Notable landmark cases include Planned Parenthood v. Casey and Bush v. Gore. His unexpected decisions left a lasting impact on American jurisprudence.

Looking from the past to the current matters of the nation’s highest court, Jim takes a look at the Supreme Court’s recent ruling allows the Trump administration’s controversial ban on transgender military personnel to proceed, highlighting ongoing tension between executive actions and judicial checks. Additionally, the Court’s decision to hear a challenge to the 14th Amendment’s birthright citizenship clause raises questions about judicial intervention in longstanding constitutional interpretations.

Justice on Trial

James Santelle — Sat, 03 May 2025 16:00:00 +0000

To kick off this week’s edition of Amicus, Jim Santelle delves into the controversial arrest of Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan by the Department of Justice, highlighting the potential misconduct and policy violations by the FBI. The discussion underscores the broader implications for judicial independence and the rule of law. Santelle also covers the developing stories around Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers receiving threats from the Trump Administration for his actions on advising state officials on how to interact with federal immigration officials.

The episode also explores recent U.S. Supreme Court cases, including debates on religious charter schools and parental opt-outs in public school curriculums, posing significant First Amendment questions. Additionally, Santelle covers a critical case challenging the ACA’s mandate on free preventive care, with potential nationwide repercussions on health insurance coverage.

Federal Arrest of a Wisconsin County Judge

James Santelle — Sat, 26 Apr 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Milwaukee was the center of breaking news on Friday morning with the arresting of Wisconsin Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan by federal law enforcement officials. This episode dives into the details surrounding the arrest of Milwaukee County Judge Dugan, and the charges of obstructing immigration agents.

Host Jim Santelle critiques the Justice Department’s approach, arguing it politicizes the judiciary to align with President Trump’s immigration policies. The discussion also touches on Governor Evers’ memo to state employees about handling ICE agents and the broader implications of federal versus state authority in courthouses.

Listeners are invited to question the balance between justice and political influence. The podcast explores the legal procedures behind her arrest, highlighting the controversial decision to physically detain her.

Late Night Orders

James Santelle — Sat, 19 Apr 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. Jim leads off the show with a breakdown of the U.S. Supreme Court’s overnight decision blocking deportations of migrants with the use of an eighteenth century war-time act. Highlighting key developments, the show covers the Supreme Court’s late-night decision and the Fourth Circuit’s powerful rebuke of government actions that deny due process.

The episode also covers the current constitutional crisis, sparked by the Trump administration’s refusal to adhere to court rulings. Judges Boasberg and Xinis are spotlighted for confronting the administration’s defiance, with Boasberg threatening contempt proceedings and Xinis demanding accountability for wrongful deportations. The discussion underscores the erosion of checks and balances, urging listeners to consider their role in preserving the Republic.

The show concludes with taking phone callers from around Wisconsin with their questions for Jim on the legal news of the week.

Immigration and Election Legal Updates

James Santelle — Sat, 12 Apr 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Jim kicks off this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review with a recap of the legal proceedings surrounding the second Trump Administration’s deportations of Venezuelan immigrants to El Salvador and taking callers on a variety of legal manners.

During the second hour, Jim also covers the issues in Columbia V. Mahmoud Khalil, the Supreme Court’s take on the Clean Air Act and the FCC, and the controversy over the Administration targeting election officials still surrounding the 2020 presidential election.

Reviewing Legal News from Wisconsin and Beyond

James Santelle — Sat, 05 Apr 2025 16:00:00 +0000

On this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle, Jim shares his latest “Injunction Function” and recaps the legal filings of Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul this past week. At the end of the first hour and beginning of the second hour, Jim touches on what is occurring with the legal battles surrounding deportations of Venezuelan immigrants to El Salvador.

Throughout the second hour, Jim provides a rundown of what the U.S. Supreme Court is currently hearing. Those cases include grants to teachers working with diversity, equity and inclusion, birthright citizenship, Catholic charities, Planned Parenthood funding and more.

International & Legal News

James Santelle — Sat, 29 Mar 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Jim kicks off this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review with a syllabus for the show and an acknowledgement of the Myanmar and Thailand earthquakes. From there, Jim takes a look at the bombings by the United States in Yemen and the fallout from defense officials using the unsecure app Signal to coordinate those U.S. strikes.

Jim takes callers around the state on the consequences of Signal-gate along with his next topic, the shutting down of law firms or at least the threats of shut downs by the second Trump Administration. Plus, this weekend’s “Injunction Function” takes a closer look at labor, diversity and deportation.

Injunction Function

James Santelle — Sat, 22 Mar 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. The show introduces a new segment titled, ‘Injunction Function’ and this week breaks down a temporary restraining orders or TRO. Jim does a deep dive on their meaning, and what it means for your understanding of our legal system.

Then, the show takes calls from listeners concerned about Elon Musk’s involvement in the second Trump Administration and the election here in Wisconsin. Plus, Jim dives into the legal case unfolding before the deportations and the U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg of what the Administration claims are Venezuelan Immigrants.

To close out the morning show, Jim does a rapid fire across the second hour including the shuttering of USAID, the dwindling of services at the Social Security Administration, a closer look at the Transgender Troop Ban, and caller comments and questions!

Amicus: A Law Review - Trump V. Law Firms

James Santelle — Sat, 15 Mar 2025 16:00:00 +0000

Amicus Notes

9:06 Show Intro/Rundown

9:20 DOJ Overview

9:34 Trump Speech @ DOJ

9:50 Trump Speech Cont.

9:54 Taking Callers

10:08 More Callers

10:20 Trump v. Law Firms

10:34 Shakespeare Alliteration

10:39 Callers

10:43 Judge Alsup “Sham” Firing

10:52 SCOTUS 14th Amendment Case

10:56 Conversion Therapy

A Growing Riff Between the Executive and Judiciary Branches

James Santelle — Sat, 08 Mar 2025 17:00:00 +0000

Good morning and welcome to another edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle! Jim lays out the syllabus for this weekend’s show, beginning with detailing the showdown this past week between President Donald Trump and Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court John Roberts. Jim breaks down the decision of the nation’s highest court to deny the hold the Trump Administration had placed on $2 billion worth of foreign aid.

In the second half of the first hour, Jim also details legal aspects that are arising in cases regarding the Clean Water Act & San Francisco Waste Water, as well as another in regards to a Hungary Holocaust Case.

Jim then begins the second hour recapping the riff between the Supreme Court and the second Trump Administration. Jim lays out the details surrounding two cases that are having oral arguments this past week. One regarding a Mexican Lawsuit against Gun Manufacturers and another regarding Nuclear Waste.

Jim takes calls from the listening audience and closes out the weekend’s program with a discussion on a religious case rising out of Oklahoma and what is going on with federal judges in Rhode Island and Washington DC.

A Monumental White House Meeting

James Santelle — Sat, 01 Mar 2025 17:00:00 +0000

Jim begins this weekend’s show walking through the syllabus for the day’s program. Jim discusses the Zelenskyy White House Visit, and takes phone callers on the subject.

Jim then takes the beginning of the second hour to tackle the subject of the termination of JAG Officers throughout the Department of Defense this week and again, takes calls on the subject. To round out the weekend’s program, Jim discusses aspects of the Bondi Justice Department and a summary of cases before the Supreme Court of the United States.

To learn more about these shows and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, BlueSky, YouTube, X, and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

"L'État, C'est Moi"

James Santelle — Sat, 22 Feb 2025 17:00:00 +0000

In today’s episode, Jim takes time to talk about authoritarianism in bygone days. This discussion comes in the wake of recent decisions from the Trump White House, who believes he is the only one who can decide what is right and what is law. History tells us those who declare “I Am The State” don’t last and aren’t remembered fondly in the history books.

On Tuesday Donald Trump issued a very significant and historic executive order, abolishing various independent agencies, bringing the power held by those groups into the Executive Branch, specifically The White House. Standing in the face a a great deal of precedence from the courts, the president is garnering more power and making sure that any and all work being done has to be in the best interest of the ~~King’s~~ president’s agenda.

Jim takes your calls, texts and livestream comments during the show answering your questions on this very historic moment in American history. We appreciate you reaching out to us with your thoughts on the matter and love hearing from you.

Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle is a part of the Civic Media radio network and airs Saturdays from 9-11 am across Wisconsin. Subscribe to the podcast to be sure not to miss out on a single episode! To learn more about the show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up.

A Week in Legal Review

James Santelle — Sat, 15 Feb 2025 17:00:00 +0000

Welcome to another edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle for a breakdown of the week’s legal headlines. Jim begins the program with a review of case surrounding New York Mayor Eric Adams in his corruption charges, and attempt for a pardon from the second Trump Administration.

Jim continues the program with a dive into Attorney General Pam Bondi’s Department of Justice. The show breaks down the powers the Justice Department yields, and some of the characters at the DOJ in the second Trump Administration. Jim rounds out the weekend by taking some phone calls and discussing some final memorandums from Bondi’s Department of Justice.

Amicus: A Law Review

James Santelle — Sat, 08 Feb 2025 17:00:00 +0000

Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle is a part of the Civic Media radio network and airs Saturdays from 9-11 am across Wisconsin. Subscribe to the podcast to be sure not to miss out on a single episode! To learn more about the show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up.

Changes at the Department of Justice

James Santelle — Sat, 01 Feb 2025 17:00:00 +0000

Beginning with the latest reporting on the tragic air crash near and profound loss of lives over the Potomac River, including some initial reflection on the appropriate roles of government in supporting and assisting the victim families and pursuing on their behalf a full and revelatory investigation of what happened. There will be more assessment of the rule of law components of those post-event obligations of our agency officials and public representatives in next week’s broadcast.

Followed by an extensive description of the major obstructive changes already underway under the Trump Administration’s Justice Department—including the suspension of important civil rights cases, the reassignment of trial attorneys from their long-standing human rights posts, the firing of prosecutors previously responsible for the criminal cases against Donald Trump for election interference and document theft, and the directive to investigate and charge local and state law enforcement officials who do not support the aggressive immigration policies of the new Administration.

Updating the most recent justice-related actions of our Supreme Court—focusing on arguments about the uses of force by our nation’s police officers and the resurrection of a federal law prohibiting money laundering. Jim also describes the flurry of oral hearings scheduled for February and March on major government issues and doctrines important to all Americans.

Finally, some “Rule of Law Snapshots” on recent in-court events involving the criminal charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams, the federal sentencing of former United States Senator Robert Menendez, and the settlement of the multi-million dollar defamation judgment against former senior White House advisor and New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Programming Note: In the next Amicus broadcast, more on the outrageous and destructive dismissal of civil servants throughout our country’s key agencies, including Justice Department lawyers and FBI agents responsible for investigating and prosecuting some 1600 January 6 rioter-insurrectionists.

A Week Full of Pardons & A Look Into the Guardrails of Justice

James Santelle — Sat, 25 Jan 2025 17:00:00 +0000

Join Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle each Saturday morning from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. as he analyzes the big legal news stories of the week and offers his own perspective on what they mean now—and for the future of our nation!

Jim begins the show with sharing where the guard rails of the U.S. Constitution are for a President of the United States. What powers do the rest of the federal government have on that office? Jim breaks it down. Jim also touches on the role of U.S. Attorney’s role, mission, and assignments of those important actors in our legal system.

The courts also play a role in the legal process surrounding the Executive Orders coming out of the White House in the first week of the second Trump Administration. What are judges saying on some of these orders in the federal courts? We’ll dive into those words shared by several federal judges this week.

Lastly, Jim touches on pardons. Both the sweeping ones issues by President Trump this week for January 6th insurrectionist, as well as the outgoing pardons by former President Joe Biden.

Of Oaths and Amendments

James Santelle — Sat, 18 Jan 2025 17:00:00 +0000

This week on Amicus: A Law Review, Jim focuses on the Oath of Office that will be taken by the 47th President of the United States on Monday, Donald Trump. Jim emphasizes what the Take Care Clause is in that Oath and why it’s language is so important.

Jim also breaks down the revelation over this past week recognizing a 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, when Joe Biden said the Equal Rights Amendment should be deemed a part of the nation’s legal doctrine. We will also get a Supreme Court update from Jim surrounding the nation’s highest court’s decision to unanimously hold up the legislation that banned Tiktok in the United States.

One Title, Two Vastly Different Men

James Santelle — Sat, 11 Jan 2025 17:00:00 +0000

At the top of the show, Jim addresses the fires blazing through Los Angeles right now and how this natural disaster will be intertwined with government, as well as the law.

Next, Jim speaks on his time as an intern in and the work of, the Carter Administration. President Carter’s funeral was this week and he was laid to rest in his home state of Georgia. Jim speaks on the work in and out of office of this nuclear engineer, peanut farmer and 39th President.

Then, Donald Trump’s case in New York has come to an end and the sentencing has been handed down. The extraordinary nature of this case, Jim explains what it means for the former president, as well as his administration going forward. Jim takes calls and texts from the listeners on this topic and beyond.

A Sentencing Date, A Feeder Court & Incoming Rule of Law Events

James Santelle — Sat, 04 Jan 2025 17:00:00 +0000

Good morning and welcome to the first edition of Amicus: A Law Review for 2025! Jim begins the show with a detailed look at the sentencing hearing we now know if coming for the president-elect this week, as Judge Juan Merchan announced Donald Trump to be in court on January 10th for that sentencing. Following that in-depth look, Jim touches on an update from the 6th U.S. Circuit Court that brought us the lower court rulings in two impactful cases in recent year from the U.S. Supreme Court; the Chevron ruling and now Net Neutrality.

After that, the show briefly touches on the citizen unrest that is taking place in South Korea following the constitutional crisis that nation is currently experiencing and the different path they are taking as a country in accountability of that crisis. Jim also dives into what is happening with pending ban of TikTok in the United States.

To wrap the show, Jim provides his predications for what will be the Top 15 Rule of Law Events coming in 2025. From civil servant protections to the constitutionality of the right to privacy, Jim shares his thoughts on what we can expect for the Rule of Law in the coming year. Finally, Jim shares a memoriam for President Jimmy Carter who passed away at the age of 100 last week. Jim had the pleasure of interning in the Carter Administration to begin his career in 1980.

A Legal Year in Review

James Santelle — Sat, 28 Dec 2024 17:00:00 +0000

Welcome to the final weekend of 2024, we’re glad that you are spending it with us here at Amicus: A Law Review! The show begins with a breakdown of the individuals that had their death sentences commuted by President Joe Biden in the final days of his Administration. Jim then spends some time talking about environmental goals and the homelessness issues facing the nation over this past year.

In the second hour, the show tackles a judiciary report on the Supreme Court of the United States, Jim talks about the TikTok ban that president-elect Donald Trump is looking to have tossed out by the SCOTUS, and we review a report surrounding Clarence Thomas. To end the final show of 2024, Jim does a legal year in review for the listeners.

Guns and the Law

James Santelle — Sat, 21 Dec 2024 17:00:00 +0000

Welcome to this week’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review. Kicking off the weekend’s news, Jim recaps the events that took place in Madison, WI this week with the Abundant Life Christian School shooting. Jim discusses what is know at this time in regard to the shooting.

Jim then discusses the aspect of ghost guns in shootings similar to the one involved in the alleged UnitedHealthCare CEO shooting. The investigations into suspect Luigi Mangione seem to indicate a ghost gun was involved in that incident.

Jim spends the second hour discussing the Juan Merchan rulings this week that did not dismiss the cases against Donald Trump in New York court. The show touches on a number of dust ups the former and soon to be once again president has had with the media. The show wraps with a brief update on cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Martial Law, Presidential Pardons and More

James Santelle — Sat, 14 Dec 2024 17:00:00 +0000

Jim lays out the case where he is going on this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review and then dives right in. First off this morning, Jim discusses the aspects of what happened in South Korea with Martial Law this month. Then, Jim revisits the presidential pardons delivered by Joe Biden and Donald Trump during his first term.

In the second hour, Jim tackles the news of the week in the Wisconsin Fake Electors case being litigated in Wisconsin state court. Throughout the hour, Jim takes your phone calls and also recaps updates from the Election Hush Money case in Manhattan. The weekend wraps with an update about the U.S. Supreme Court.

A Dive Into Presidential Pardons

James Santelle — Sat, 07 Dec 2024 17:00:00 +0000

Welcome to this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle. This weekend, Jim provides an overview of something that a lot have folks have been talking about over the past week, presidential pardons. Jim gives a history of presidential pardons, talks about the specific pardon given to Hunter Biden this past week by his father President Joe Biden and then touches on the topic of preemptive pardons in the remaining days of the Biden Administration.

In hour two, Jim breaks down a case that is before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding vaping and takes a call from host of the WMDX morning show, John Peterson. Later in the hour, Jim touches on United States v. Skrmetti, the transgender rights court cases before the Supreme Court of the United States. Jim rounds out the hour with a discussion of Kash Patel and martial law in South Korea.

Consequences of an Election

James Santelle — Sat, 30 Nov 2024 17:00:00 +0000

On this last Saturday of November, Jim Santelle starts off the show by taking a look at what this month’s election means for legal cases that surrounded former President Trump before being re-elected. Jim then takes a look at U.S. Supreme Court statistics, dives into the Nom-Delegation Doctrine and recaps a few of the cases that may or may not come before the Court in this next term.

Jim also takes your calls on the legal questions of the day and takes a trip around the legal world sharing of cases law in Australia and Great Britain. Amicus concludes for this week’s edition with a review of a case developing in Texas surrounding public education and bibles.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

The Status of Trials, A Cabinet, and Overseas Legal News

James Santelle — Sat, 23 Nov 2024 17:00:00 +0000

On this week’s Amicus, a packed syllabus as Jim covers developments in the cases being prosecuted against President-elect Trump, nominations for Trump’s cabinet, and some legal news from overseas.

First, analyzing Pam Bondi, Trump’s newest nomination for the Attorney General of the United States. This nomination follows Matt Gaetz’ nomination for the position and voluntary withdrawal after only 8 short days. So who is Pam Bondi? What qualifications does she possess and what concerns need to be addressed by the Senate in their duty to advise and consent to this nomination? Next, updates on the long-delayed sentencing from New York’s felony financial crimes and election interference case against Donald Trump.

Why has Judge Merchan once more removed the sentencing session from the calendar? And what comes now? Jim urges every professional involved in this case and in those federal cases not yet being prosecuted: do not obey in advance. Despite your legitimate fears of reprisal, do NOT bend, do not bow to accommodate Trump. Let justice speak, and let justice reign. Finally, a few lessons we can learn from overseas in Brazil, Hong Kong, and France.

And in Brazil, a case eerily reminiscent of Trump’s incitement of insurrection on January 6th, 2021. From Hong Kong, what advocates for democracy face under autocracies. And finally, continuing coverage from France of the ongoing trial as Gisele Pelicot seeks justice for horrific sexual abuse at the hands of her husband and dozens of other defendants.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

The Next Department of Justice

James Santelle — Sat, 16 Nov 2024 17:00:00 +0000

Welcome to this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review. During this weekend’s show, Jim remembers Ted Olson, former Solicitor General of the United States who passed away this past week and then dives into the week’s legal news.

The overwhelming legal headline of the week, Donald Trump has selected former Congressman Matt Gaetz to lead the Department of Justice in his second term. Gaetz was apparently the subject of an upcoming ethics report that is uncertain to be released following Gaetz resigning from Congress. Jim also touches base on the number of other positions being nominated by president-elect Donald Trump at the Department of Justice.

In the second hour, Jim gives a brief update from the United State Supreme Court and then expands on what the deputy Attorneys General nominations mean, along with who Trump has tapped to be the next Solicitor General.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

Donald J. Trump: A Lawsuit Review

James Santelle — Sat, 09 Nov 2024 17:00:00 +0000

A lot has happened since we last met. Former President Trump is now President-Elect Trump and with that comes a lot of questions over what is going to happen with his existing cases. Jim gives an overview of the election, as well as what could happen to Donald Trump in the courtroom before or after he takes office.

In the second hour, Jim continues his review of what the country could possibly look like under a second Trump administration and why legal questions asked, but never tested are going to create new policies and practices inside and outside the courts.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

International Reforms & Last Minute Election Shenanigans

James Santelle — Sat, 02 Nov 2024 16:00:00 +0000

On this weekend’s edition of Amicus, Jim dives into international judicial reforms in Mexico. Then, Jim describes the threats that are growing from the possibility of the U.S. Department of Justice to jail political opponents under a second Trump Administration.

Jim then wraps the final edition of Amicus before the November 5th General Election by talking about the U.S. Supreme Court’s greenlight of a voter purge in Virginia and voting issues in Pennsylvania.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

True Crime and the Probability of a Toss Up

James Santelle — Sat, 26 Oct 2024 16:00:00 +0000

This weekend on Amicus: A Law Review, Jim dives into a variety of legal topics and cases to share what you need to know from the land of the law. Jim kicks off the show with a look at the Baltimore Bridge Settlement and the case surrounding the Menendez Brothers following a recent true crime streaming movie following their story.

Jim then dives into a hypothetical scenario of what happens if Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump were to tie in the upcoming election. Jim wraps the show by taking a look at how the Department of Justice has or has not been subject to exploitation.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

A Weekend Review from Madison

James Santelle — Sat, 19 Oct 2024 16:00:00 +0000

Join Jim Santelle as he walks us through the latest updates on cases at the Supreme court, Trump criminal trials, and more! Jim traveled to Madison for this weekend’s edition of Amicus, to share legal updates of this past week from here in Wisconsin, the nation and the world.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

New Term, New Cases to Break Down

James Santelle — Sat, 12 Oct 2024 16:00:00 +0000

On this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review, Jim Santelle takes a look at the upcoming cases before the U.S. Supreme Court as they begin a new term. Jim spends much of the first hour discussing the oral arguments in the abortion case coming out of Texas, as well as the ghost gun case coming before the highest court.

In hour two, Jim debriefs on the death row case before the Supreme Court and a case the court may hear about transgender rights. Jim then dives into recaps several cases before the 5th Circuit Court surrounding e-cigarettes pornography, DNA in a death penalty case, and nuclear waste.

Jim also talks about the data breach that took place at Facebook, the Nvidia Case and shares a programming note with the audience.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

Unsealed and Out in the Open

James Santelle — Sat, 05 Oct 2024 16:00:00 +0000

This weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review dives into the revelations in the case Special Counsel Jack Smith is bringing against former President Donald Trump in federal court. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan unsealed a filing that case this week and there is a lot to discuss from Special Counsel Smith’s evidence against the former President. Jim breaks down the revelation in the case and takes calls on the subject as well.

Then, in hour two of Amicus, Jim shares updates in the legal case being brought by Haitian migrants against folks that have been attacking their immigration status in Springfield, OH. Jim also touches on the state abortion ban being overturned in Georgia and the prosecution of Tyre Nichols.

Jim concludes with an update on Wisconsin voting machines and a rundown of FBI crime statistics for listeners.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

Legal Updates from at Home and Abroad

James Santelle — Sat, 28 Sep 2024 16:00:00 +0000

On this weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review, Jim Santelle kicks off the morning with updates from the current litigation surrounding former President Donald Trump. That leads into Jim discussing the move this week of former New York Mayor and Trump Campaign attorney Rudy Giuliani being disbarred in Washington D.C. this week. Jim also touches base on the hack of the Trump campaign by Iran.

Bridging the hours this week, Jim touches bases on the indictment of current New York Mayor Eric Adams and the ties to Turkey that sparked the indictment. The show then highlights cases to keep an eye on ahead of the November election, voting rights in Arizona and the need for local clerks in Georgia to now hand count ballots in southern swing state.

The show wraps for the week with a legal story from the south of France where a man is on trial for decades of drugging his wife and committing sexual violence against her, along with updates from the U.S. legal cases surrounding Sean “Diddy” Combs and Harvey Weinstein.

Election Administration, Legal Rapid Fire, & More!

James Santelle — Sat, 21 Sep 2024 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to another edition of Civic Media’s weekend legal program, Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle! Jim kicks off the show with a discussion surrounding judicial reforms in Mexico. Then, Jim talks about the U.S. Supreme Court’s three case decision to round out the first hour.

In hour two, Jim breaks down Supreme Court threat protection and books by Supreme Court Justices if you’re all done with your summer reading list. Turning to a more serious note, Jim then discusses issues facing the administration of the upcoming election by a surprising culprit, Sheriffs. From casting doubts on absentee ballot drop boxes, to public posting about elections, to membership in anti-government groups, Jim breaks down the issue.

Jim then closes out the show with a rapid fire round of coverage with discussing the “Sensitive Places” case before the 9th Circuit Court, an impeachment against an Alaskan Judge, a NLRB decision regarding Texas, and the Hunter Biden sentencing.

To learn more about these shows and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

"An Unprecedented Spike" In Threats Against The DOJ

James Santelle — Sat, 14 Sep 2024 16:00:00 +0000

This weekend on Amicus, Jim Santelle covers the latest in national legal news. On Thursday, Attorney General Merrick Garland delivered a 22-minute speech addressing a sharp increase in threats leveled at agencies like the DOJ and FBI. After breaking down the speech, Jim speaks on more developments in cases related to Donald Trump, including January 6th, the Georgia election, and Chicago’s Trump Tower. Jim then extensively updates us on the Tyre Nichols case before closing with news on Russian election interference.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

Trump's New York Sentencing Delayed

James Santelle — Sat, 07 Sep 2024 16:00:00 +0000

This week on Amicus: A Law Review, Jim Santelle guides us through the latest updates on Donald Trump’s cases in both New York and Washington, D.C. In the second hour, Jim takes your calls before addressing the tragic mass shooting in Georgia.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

Legal Review Over the Holiday Weekend

James Santelle — Sat, 31 Aug 2024 16:00:00 +0000

It’s not the holiday weekend yet, so let’s recap this past week of legal news with Amicus: A Law Review with James Santelle. Jim starts off the show with laying out everything he will cover on this weekend’s edition and then dives into the new Grand Jury indictment against former President Donald Trump. Then, Jim discusses the hearing set for September 5th by Judge Chutkan.

Jim kicks off the second hour of this week’s Amicus by covering the 11th Circuit Appeal surrounding the case in Mar-a-Lago. Jim also takes calls throughout the hour and touches base on a case working it’s way through the Georgia Appeals Court. To round out the week, Jim does a lightning round of recaps for the New York Hush Money case, an emergency Supreme Court docket, January 6th defendants and candidates on the Wisconsin ballot.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

The Supreme Court's Summer in Review

James Santelle — Sat, 24 Aug 2024 16:00:00 +0000

This weekend’s edition of Amicus: A Law Review begins with Jim recapping what the Supreme Court of the United States has been up to this summer. Then, Jim dives into the voting case in Arizona, an abortion referendum in Arkansas and a machine gun ban in Kansas throughout the first hour.

In hour two, Jim reviews what is happening with a lawyer for the Oath Keepers, one of the groups that was responsible and present throughout the insurrection against the United States on January 6th, 2021. Jim then goes on to discuss a clerk in Arizona that was found, former U.S. Representative George Santos who pled guilty this week, and touches on the RealPage Rent Collusion case that surfaced this week. Amicus wraps for the weekend with a few thoughts on undocumented spouses in the United States and what recent proposals would mean for those families.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

A Coast-to-Coast Legal Review

James Santelle — Sat, 17 Aug 2024 16:00:00 +0000

Jim begins the show with sharing a rundown of the legal topics he plans to cover this weekend on Amicus: A Law Review. Kicking it off, the show dives into updates from a New York court case and that ballot cases taking place in the state of Georgia. To round out the first hour, Jim shares his reaction to the developments in the case surrounding Matthew Perry’s death and the arrests this week that took place.

For the second hour, Jim reviews the Supreme Court Case surrounding transgender rights, a Montana legal case involving abortion that will make it to the Supreme Court and the UCLA Jewish Student case. Amicus wraps up the second hour with a discussion surrounding the 8th Circuit’s review of the SAVE Plan and a book ban case along with the 4th Circuit’s review of semi-automatic weapons ban in Maryland.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

Court Cases, Ethics Requirements & Civil Protests

James Santelle — Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:00:00 +0000

Good morning and thank you for joining Amicus: A Law Review on this second weekend of August. Jim kicks off the show with updates from a multitude of court cases from around the country. In the final segment of the first hour, Jim also updates listeners on the fake elector scheme.

To begin the second hour, Jim launches into the discussion of what should be done to reform the ethics of the U.S. Supreme Court. After that topic, Jim dives into international protests occurring around the world right now, specifically in Bangladesh.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

Supreme Court Reform and Suitcases Filled with Money

James Santelle — Sat, 03 Aug 2024 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to another weekend of legal review! Jim kicks off this week of Amicus: A Law Review with coverage of the recent proposals from the Biden/Harris Administration to tackle Supreme Court of the United States reforms.

Jim then touches on the legal status around the Guantanamo Bay terrorists and a mysterious payment involving the Egypt government of $10 million. To wrap up the weekend, Jim then touches on the 5th Circuit Court Voting Rights case and what it could mean going forward.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

Ballot Challenges and Ethics Reform

James Santelle — Sat, 27 Jul 2024 16:00:00 +0000

With the Supreme Court term concluding earlier this month, Amicus: A Law Review with Jim Santelle takes a look at some of the proposals circulating around Supreme Court ethics reform. But before that, Jim tackles some of the hypothetical arguments that are being floated around in regards to legal challenges around elections now that Vice President Kamala Harris has become the presumptive Democratic nominee.

Then, in the second hour of Amicus, Jim discusses some of the legislative responses that are coming up around the country after the U.S. Supreme Court cases that were decided at the end of this past term. To conclude this weekend’s show, Jim provides an update on the criminal cases that the Republican nominee Donald Trump is facing and likely cases surrounding transgender rights that the Supreme Court may take up in this next term.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

Justice, Home & Abroad

James Santelle — Sat, 20 Jul 2024 16:00:00 +0000

Good morning! From the WAUK Studios, James Santelle kicks off the show with a tease of what is to come and then jumps into his recap of the Judge Aileen Cannon Case (U.S. v. Trump). Jim then turns to updates from the Supreme Court and what is next to come now that the most recent term has wrapped.

Starting off the second hour, Jim then gets into the Biden Administration’s planned reforms for the Supreme Court, including potential term limits. Jim also takes calls and discusses a little bit more of what could come before the nation’s highest court in there next term.

Jim then wraps the show with a discussion on Justice In Egypt & Russia and what is going on in Courts overseas.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

Jim Santelle Breaks Down Trump v. United States

James Santelle — Sat, 13 Jul 2024 16:00:00 +0000

The balance of powers in the United States has changed, due to the US Supreme Court on Trump v. United States. Welcome to a laser-focused episode of Amicus: A Law Review with attorney Jim Santelle. He’s analyzing the entirety of the SCOTUS decision finding that presidents are entitled to absolute immunity for any and all official actions taken in the course of their position as President. Already, this case is reshaping how constitutional scholars, legal experts, and political professionals understand the role of President of the United States and the rule of law in this country. Buckle up, we’ve got a lot of ground to cover..

In the second hour, Jim digs into how Trump v. United States may impact the four ongoing prosecutions against the 45th president of said United States. It is hard to predict just how transformative this decision will be for American history over the next weeks, months, years, and decades. In short, it is going to get very complicated.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

A Seismic Shift in Constitutional Powers

James Santelle — Sat, 06 Jul 2024 16:00:00 +0000

The U.S. Supreme Court term has come to an end. Join Jim Santelle for a breakdown of the remaining decisions announced by the Court, especially Trump v. United States that U.S. Presidents have immunity when it comes to official acts in their office. Jim discusses the ramifications of the case and takes callers throughout the second hour about what this means for the country.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

Bonus Episode: As the Supreme Court Term Comes to an End... (Part 2)

James Santelle — Sun, 30 Jun 2024 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to the second edition of Amicus: A Law Review with James Santelle for the weekend of June 29th and 30th! After a rapid fire week of U.S. Supreme Court rulings, Jim has prepared a bonus edition of Amicus: A Law Review for this weekend.

In this second of two editions of Amicus, Jim begins the breakdown of those court decisions with Fischer v. United States. After taking a deep dive into that case, Jim then begins discussing the case of Moyle v. United States which took up the issue of emergency abortion care in the state of Idaho. Jim Santelle then summarizes the James Snyder Bribe Case. In the second hour, Jim also tackles Harrington v. Purdue Pharma and the City of Grand Pass v. Johnson and then sets up where the show will go next week.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

As the Supreme Court Term Comes to an End... (Part 1)

James Santelle — Sat, 29 Jun 2024 16:00:00 +0000

Welcome to another edition of Amicus: A Law Review with James Santelle! After a rapid fire week of U.S. Supreme Court rulings, Jim has prepared a bonus edition of Amicus: A Law Review for this weekend. In this first of two editions of Amicus, Jim begins the breakdown of those court decisions with SEC v. Jarkesy.

Then, Amicus dives into Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency, and the Social Media Cases before the court. Jim concludes this first of two weekend editions of Amicus with commentary on the Supreme Court trends that the cases from this past week have continued.

To learn more about this show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the network on Facebook, X, YouTube and Instagram to keep up with Civic Media!

Gun Rights, Tax Law, and Ten Commandments: Supreme Court Controversies

James Santelle — Sat, 22 Jun 2024 16:00:00 +0000

In this week’s episode of “Amicus,” host Jim Santelle delves into a packed legal syllabus, discussing some of the most pivotal and controversial Supreme Court cases currently shaping the landscape of American law and governance.

The episode kicks off with an analysis of U.S. v. Rahimi, a landmark decision addressing gun restrictions for individuals under restraining orders. This case explores the balance between gun rights and public safety, revealing how the Supreme Court is navigating its historical precedents to rule on contemporary issues.

Next, Santelle covers Moore v. United States, a case that delves into tax law and its broader implications for potential wealth taxes in America. The conversation unpacks the complexities of tax provisions and the constitutional debates surrounding them, providing insights into how these decisions could shape future fiscal policies.

The discussion then shifts to the ongoing legal battles involving Judge Aileen Cannon and the Mar-a-Lago documents case. Santelle examines the judicial maneuvers and the broader implications of Judge Cannon’s rulings, highlighting the challenges and delays in this high-profile case involving former President Donald Trump.

Finally, the episode wraps up with a look at a recent legislative move in Louisiana, mandating the display of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms. Santelle revisits the historical Supreme Court decisions on this issue and debates the constitutional conflicts it raises, particularly in the context of the First Amendment.

Join Jim on this informative journey through the latest Supreme Court rulings and legal controversies, offering a deep dive into the judicial decisions that impact our nation.

Supreme Court Showdowns: Guns, Abortion, and Intellectual Property

James Santelle — Sat, 15 Jun 2024 16:00:00 +0000

In this episode of Amicus, James Santelle dives into a critical analysis of recent Supreme Court decisions that are shaping the legal landscape of the United States. The episode begins with an in-depth discussion on the controversial ruling regarding bump stocks, where the Supreme Court struck down the Trump-era ban. This decision not only impacts gun regulations but also questions the authority of federal agencies like the ATF.

The conversation then shifts to the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision on the abortion pill Mifepristone. This landmark ruling addresses the standing of plaintiffs and the intricate balance between federal authority and reproductive rights, ensuring the drug remains available despite ongoing legal battles. James Santelle provides insightful commentary on the implications of this decision for the future of abortion laws in America.

Finally, the episode takes a lighter yet significant turn as it explores the intellectual property case involving the phrase “Trump too small.” This unanimous ruling delves into the nuances of trademark law, First Amendment rights, and the historical context of judicial decisions. James Santelle expertly navigates through the legal arguments and the broader implications of this ruling for free speech and political satire.

Discontent, Contempt, and Courtly Discord

James Santelle — Sat, 08 Jun 2024 16:00:00 +0000

As the Supreme Court prepares to release decisions on 30 critical cases over the next few weeks, Jim provides an insightful preview of what these rulings might entail. From privacy rights and abortion to social media regulations and ethics in the judiciary, this episode promises to keep you informed on the legal landscape that shapes our society.

Jim also tackles the recent controversies involving Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, discussing the implications of undisclosed gifts and the need for judicial recusal in significant cases. Beyond the Supreme Court, the episode delves into high-profile trials, including those of Hunter Biden and Senator Robert Menendez, shedding light on their progress and potential outcomes.

Listeners will also hear about local legal developments, such as the felony charges against architects of the fake-electors scheme in Wisconsin. With Jim’s thorough analysis and engaging commentary, this episode is a must-listen for anyone interested in the intersection of law, governance, and justice.

Historic Trump Verdict, Supreme Court Decisions, and Pride Month Reflections

James Santelle — Sat, 01 Jun 2024 16:00:00 +0000

In this engaging episode of Amicus, the Law Review, host James Santelle delves into a pivotal week in the world of law and governance. The episode opens with a detailed discussion on the landmark criminal conviction of former President Donald Trump, dissecting the legal nuances and broader implications of the historic verdict. Listeners will gain insights into the trial’s conduct, the roles of the prosecution and defense, and the critical thinking exemplified by the jury. Santelle emphasizes the significance of expertise in the legal system, offering a compelling narrative that underscores the importance of rule of law in maintaining justice and democracy.

The conversation shifts to a recent unanimous decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in NRA vs. Vullo. Santelle breaks down the Court’s reasoning, highlighting Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s opinion and its implications for First Amendment rights and government advocacy. This segment provides a clear understanding of the boundaries between free speech and coercion by state officials.

In the final segment, Santelle commemorates Pride Month by revisiting a significant legal milestone: the 10-year anniversary of the Wolf vs. Walker decision, which affirmed same-sex marriage rights in Wisconsin. Featuring an interview with plaintiffs Pam Klyce and Salud Garcia, the discussion explores their personal journey through the lawsuit, the challenges they faced, and the broader impact of their victory on LGBTQIA+ rights. This heartwarming segment celebrates their courage and highlights the ongoing struggle for equality and justice.

Unethical Alito

James Santelle — Sat, 25 May 2024 16:00:00 +0000

Join host James Santelle for another riveting show where the chaos of American politics is contained by Jim’s wise words.

In this week’s episode of Amicus Law Review, host James Santelle dives deep into the controversy surrounding Associate Justice Sam Alito. He kicks things off with a discussion on the ethics and implications of Justice Alito’s recent actions, including the display of controversial flags and his cynical views on fundamental government institutions. This episode explores how Alito’s behavior and statements may compromise the impartiality expected from a Supreme Court Justice.

Jim then shifts focus to the broader implications of these actions, drawing connections to landmark cases and recent decisions that highlight Alito’s contentious positions. From the Voting Rights Act to the recent Dobbs decision, the episode unpacks the potential biases that may affect future rulings on critical issues such as social media, gun control, and presidential immunity.

In the second half, James delves into the latest Supreme Court ruling on gerrymandering in South Carolina. With a detailed analysis of the majority opinion penned by Justice Alito and the scathing dissent from Justice Kagan, he offers a thorough examination of the case’s impact on racial and political gerrymandering. Listeners are invited to consider the broader implications for electoral integrity and judicial accountability. Join James for a compelling discussion on the future of justice in America.

Supremely Out of Control

James Santelle — Sat, 18 May 2024 16:00:00 +0000

On this Saturday’s show, fearless host James Santelle explores two pivotal Supreme Court decisions: one affirming the constitutionality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and another reinstating a congressional map in Louisiana, which includes a second majority-black district. These rulings highlight the court’s stance on consumer rights and voting equality, respectively. Jim provides an in-depth analysis of these decisions and their broader implications for American jurisprudence.

Additionally, we examine the controversial upside-down flag incident at Justice Samuel Alito’s residence, its significance in the context of current political tensions, and what it reveals about the justice’s perspectives on government and law.

Finally, the episode covers the latest updates from the ongoing trials of high-profile figures such as former President Donald Trump and Senator Bob Menendez. Jim breaks down the testimonies, legal strategies, and potential outcomes of these landmark cases.

The Meaning of Law

James Santelle — Sat, 11 May 2024 16:00:00 +0000

Join host James Santelle for a riveting weekend episode of “Amicus, a Law Review,” where we delve into the most significant legal developments of our time. In this episode, we explore the high-profile trial of former President Donald Trump, analyzing the key testimonies from witnesses like Hope Hicks, Stormy Daniels, and Michael Cohen. Jim breaks down the critical rulings by Justice Juan Merchan and discusses the broader implications of this historic case on the American legal system.

Jim’s expert overview also turns our attention to the U.S. Supreme Court, examining upcoming decisions that could reshape the landscape of federal agency powers and social media regulation. Key cases such as Loper Bright Enterprises vs. Raimondo and Harrington vs. Purdue Pharma are dissected, highlighting their potential impacts on environmental policy, consumer protection, and the accountability of corporate giants like the Sackler family.

In today’s “Undiscovered Justice” segment, we revisit the contempt conviction of Steve Bannon and the sentencing recommendations for David DePape, the attacker of Paul Pelosi. These stories underscore the ongoing battle against political extremism and the enforcement of the rule of law in America. Tune in to gain a deeper understanding of these pivotal moments and their consequences for justice and governance.

Unveiling Inequality

James Santelle — Sat, 04 May 2024 16:00:00 +0000

Throughout the broadcast, James delves into the concept of “Amicus Curiae” – a legal mechanism where individuals or organizations, not directly involved in a case, provide courts with information and insights that may influence judicial decisions. This episode explains the pivotal role these contributions play in shaping legal outcomes, particularly in cases involving broad public interests such as civil rights and human rights. By integrating historical context and contemporary relevance, James elucidates the strategic importance of these interventions in American jurisprudence and beyond.

As James engages with listeners, he outlines the ambitions of “Amicus” to serve as a bridge between complex legal concepts and civic engagement. With a commitment to enhancing community understanding and participation in legal matters, the show invites listeners to view themselves as “friends of the court” – informed, involved, and influential in the legal landscape. This episode is not just a transition in name but a recommitment to empowering the audience with knowledge and insight into the legal systems that shape their rights and responsibilities.

Trump vs. United States - A Historic Legal Battle

James Santelle — Sat, 27 Apr 2024 16:00:00 +0000

In this gripping episode of Amicus, host Jim Santelle dives into the landmark Supreme Court case, Trump vs. United States, examining the unprecedented arguments surrounding presidential immunity from prosecution. Santelle, with his astute legal insight, unfolds the complexities of this case, discussing the potential ramifications for the rule of law and democratic governance in America. The episode doesn’t just highlight the legal arguments but also taps into the societal and political undercurrents that make this case a defining moment in U.S. history.

Santelle’s narration brings to life the intense courtroom drama, where the nation’s top justices grapple with constitutional precedents versus modern-day legal interpretations. The episode further explores how this case could reshape the understanding of presidential powers and responsibilities, challenging long-standing legal norms. With expert analysis and a compelling narrative, Santelle ensures listeners grasp the gravity of the proceedings and their possible impact on the future of the presidency.

Moreover, the podcast delves into the broader implications of the court’s decision, engaging listeners with scenarios of how this could influence future presidential conduct and accountability. Santelle encourages a robust dialogue, urging the audience to consider the balance of powers, the role of the judiciary, and the essence of democratic accountability. This episode is not just a legal review; it’s a call to civic awareness and participation in the ongoing discourse about justice and leadership in the United States.

Amicus - A New Era

James Santelle — Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:00:00 +0000

At long last, the team behind Civic Media’s Morning Cannolis is proud to announce the launch of our new show – Amicus: A Law Review with Attorney James Santelle! With no time wasted on his own ego, James is eagerly waiting to introduce you to the new layout as well as get you up to date on the latest in law across America. Take a listen!

Mar-a-la-Going to Jail?

James Santelle — Sat, 16 Mar 2024 16:00:00 +0000

In this thought-provoking episode, we dive deep into the intricate web of legal battles ensnaring former President Donald Trump, spanning from the bustling courts of Manhattan to the pressing concerns in Georgia and Florida. Join Jim as he meticulously dissects the recent developments in these high-profile cases, offering a riveting narrative that not only captures the essence of these legal proceedings but also the broader implications for the rule of law and justice in America.

The episode begins with an insightful analysis of the delayed trial in the so-called hush money case in Manhattan, shedding light on the last-minute discovery of a trove of documents and its impact on the trial’s timeline. As we journey further south, the spotlight shifts to Georgia, where Jim offers a masterful breakdown of the challenges facing the prosecution team led by Fani Willis, amidst a swirling controversy over internal dynamics and their potential influence on the case’s integrity.

In the final leg of our legal tour, we explore the Mar-a-Lago documents case in Florida, unraveling the complexities surrounding the alleged mishandling of sensitive documents. Throughout the episode, Jim not only provides a rich analysis of these legal battles but also contextualizes their significance against the backdrop of America’s judicial landscape, inviting listeners to ponder the intricate relationship between power, politics, and the pursuit of justice.

The Court Pivots

James Santelle — Sat, 09 Mar 2024 17:00:00 +0000

This episode delves into the Supreme Court’s latest ruling, setting the stage for a comprehensive analysis of its implications on the political and judicial landscapes. Jim Santelle expertly navigates the intricate details of the Court’s decision, focusing on the legal reasoning behind the unanimous judgment and the dissenting opinions, providing listeners with a clear understanding of the complex legal principles at play. Through engaging discussions, the episode illuminates the potential impacts of the ruling on future electoral processes and the broader quest for justice, offering a unique perspective on the balance of power between state and federal authorities. Special attention is given to the interplay of legal arguments, historical context, and the justices’ perspectives, making this episode a must-listen for anyone interested in the dynamics of American jurisprudence and its effects on the fabric of democracy.

Trumping the Trump Family

James Santelle — Sat, 02 Mar 2024 17:00:00 +0000

Dive deep into the pivotal Supreme Court rulings that are shaping the future of American democracy in this compelling episode of Morning Canollis with James Santelle. Explore the intricate legal battles faced by Donald Trump, the clash between state and federal powers over social media, and the contentious debate surrounding bump stocks. James Santelle provides an unparalleled analysis of how these legal decisions extend beyond the courtroom, influencing every facet of American life and governance.

Unpack the complexities of presidential immunity, election laws, and the regulatory challenges of our digital age. With Santelle’s expert commentary, listeners will gain a nuanced understanding of the current legal landscape and its implications for civil liberties and justice. This episode is not just for legal enthusiasts but anyone keen on grasping the profound impact of the judiciary on societal norms and individual rights.

Engage with a narrative that brings to light the significance of recent Supreme Court decisions and their broader societal implications. Through James Santelle’s insightful discussions, this episode promises a thought-provoking journey into the heart of America’s legal system. Whether you’re a seasoned legal professional or a curious mind looking to understand the intricacies of law and its influence on our daily lives, this episode is a must-listen.

From the Birkebeiner!

James Santelle — Sat, 24 Feb 2024 17:00:00 +0000

Join James Santelle in a captivating episode of Morning Canolis, where the vibrant heart of Wisconsin’s community, law, and tradition unfolds. This episode takes you through a journey across various facets of Wisconsin’s societal pulse, from the fervor of the American Birkebeiner ski race in Cable and Hayward to the intricate legal debates echoing in Alabama’s courts. Delve into discussions that span the historical roots of the Birkebeiner, reflecting on its deep-seated values of courage and resilience, and navigate through the complexities of recent legal rulings that challenge and redefine principles of justice and humanity.

Listeners are invited to explore the multifaceted impact of these topics, from economic implications to philosophical and ethical inquiries, shedding light on how local traditions and national legal decisions intertwine with the fabric of American society. This episode is a must-listen for those intrigued by the dynamic interplay between culture, law, and community engagement, offering insightful reflections on the significance of preserving historical legacies while confronting contemporary legal challenges.

The Laws and the Orders

James Santelle — Sat, 17 Feb 2024 17:00:00 +0000

Jim Santelle leads off the top of today’s broadcast with a focus on recent legal developments involving Donald Trump, including a detailed discussion on the financial implications of legal judgments against him. Santelle explores the complexities of Trump’s financial obligations and the potential impact on his assets, offering a nuanced perspective on the legal and financial strategies in play.

The episode also touches on the broader implications of these legal battles, including the role of the attorney general’s office and the challenges Trump faces in securing bonds for appeal processes. Through interviews and listener call-ins, Santelle and his guests dissect the multifaceted aspects of these cases, providing listeners with a comprehensive understanding of the legal landscape. The show encourages audience engagement, inviting listeners to share their views and questions, adding a dynamic and interactive element to the broadcast.

Today’s show serves as a critical platform for discussing the implications of high-profile legal cases, highlighting the intersection of law, finance, and politics. Santelle’s expertise and the participation of informed guests make the show a valuable resource for listeners seeking to navigate the complexities of current affairs. Through detailed analysis and engaging discussion, the episode exemplifies the show’s commitment to informing and involving its audience in the critical issues of the day.

Rules, Laws, and the Rule of Law

James Santelle — Sat, 10 Feb 2024 17:00:00 +0000

In today’s episode, James Santelle dissects the ongoing legal battles surrounding former President Donald J. Trump and the intricate web of court decisions that could have profound implications for the future of American democracy.

James kicks off the discussion by diving into the contentious issue of presidential immunity. As outlined in recent court proceedings, including the Colorado case, the question of whether sitting presidents are immune from prosecution has become a focal point of debate. Host James Santelle unpacks the potential consequences of these legal battles, highlighting the delicate balance between executive power and accountability.

Our callers weigh in on the United States v. Fisher case, which centers on Joseph Fisher’s challenge to an obstruction of an official proceeding charge related to the Capitol riot. With parallels to Trump’s own indictment, this case raises fundamental questions about the rule of law and the accountability of individuals involved in insurrectionary acts. Santelle and callers dissect the nuances of the legal arguments and speculate on the potential outcomes, underscoring the far-reaching implications for the broader political landscape.

The conversation takes a sobering turn as we examine Special Counsel Jack Smith’s efforts to protect witness safety in the classified document case. Santelle and his callers express grave concerns about the repercussions of unsealing sensitive documents, particularly in light of recent threats made against potential witnesses. They explore the legal standards at play and the potential ramifications for the integrity of the judicial process.

Finally, the episode concludes with a reflection on the recent decision not to prosecute President Joe Biden, amidst allegations of willful misconduct. Santelle and his guests delve into the importance of upholding professionalism and adhering to standard Department of Justice protocols, while cautioning against the politicization of legal proceedings.

Trials and Trivializations

James Santelle — Sat, 03 Feb 2024 17:00:00 +0000

Welcome to Morning Canolli, your go-to podcast for a deep dive into the legal landscape of America. In our latest episode, host Jim Santel and producer Johnny unravel the intricate threads of the nation’s legal tapestry. We explore pivotal Supreme Court cases, delving into the intersection of the internet and social media, addressing gun control issues, and examining affirmative action in universities.

This week’s episode also sheds light on the heated immigration battle between the Biden administration and Texas Governor Greg Abbott, with potential Supreme Court involvement looming large. Our legal journey continues with anticipation building around a judge’s imminent decision in a case involving valuations by Donald Trump, spearheaded by the New York Attorney General. We dissect Trump’s response to the recent defamation case, exploring his plans for an appeal and scrutinizing the judge involved.

But that’s not all – our podcast takes a comprehensive look at recent sentences, a major national security compromise involving a CIA employee, and criminal charges against parents in a tragic mass shooting case. Jim Santel wraps up the episode with a glimpse into the future, highlighting potential upcoming events in the courts and emphasizing the busy legal week ahead. Join us on Morning Canolli for an engaging and informative exploration of the legal intricacies shaping the nation.

Deterring Defamation

James Santelle — Sat, 27 Jan 2024 17:00:00 +0000

Welcome to another insightful episode of “Morning Cannolis” with your host, James Santelle. In this episode, we delve into critical legal matters shaping our world. Beginning with a landmark decision from the International Court of Justice, we explore the interim ruling directing Israel to take action to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza. Join us as we analyze the implications and reactions surrounding this significant international legal development.

Shifting gears, we turn our attention to a recent decision in a U.S. federal district court in New York, where former President Donald Trump has been found responsible for defamation. James Santelle breaks down the jury’s decision and discusses its potential impact on other legal battles involving Trump.

Our legal journey continues with updates on various court proceedings, including a look at the DC Court of Appeals, a Colorado case addressing Trump’s presence on the Republican primary ballot, and insightful discussions on the death penalty in America. Santelle navigates the intricacies of the Eighth Amendment and recent court decisions, shedding light on the evolving landscape of capital punishment.

Stay tuned for a closer examination of a pending case in the U.S. Supreme Court that could significantly impact the criminal prosecution of Donald Trump. Join James Santelle on “Morning Cannolis” as he unravels the complexities of the legal world and its profound implications on our lives.

Seeing the Future

James Santelle — Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:00:00 +0000

Today, James Santelle looks one year into the future at the upcoming 2024 presidential election, where candidates Joseph Biden and Donald Trump are poised to face off again.

Jim takes a deep dive into two pivotal news stories that have captured the nation’s attention. Firstly, the shocking results of a long-term Department of Justice investigation into the tragic shooting at Uvalde, Texas, in May 2022. Highlighting the failure of law enforcement in responding to the incident, he dissects the findings, emphasizing the importance of due process and the pursuit of justice in such critical situations.

In addition to the Uvalde case, Santelle turns his focus to a major Supreme Court case that threatens to reshape the future of federal agencies and their operations.

Trials Of Democracy

James Santelle — Sat, 13 Jan 2024 17:00:00 +0000

Welcome to Morning Cannolis with Jim Santelle! In this week’s episode, Jim dives deep into the world of law, government, and the pursuit of justice in America. Broadcasting on WAUK Radio, Jim brings you a thought-provoking agenda that combines academic rigor with civic awareness.

Join Jim as he explores significant news events, unraveling the complexities behind what happened and why it matters. From international cases in Israel and Chile to the heart of the United States political campaigns, Morning Cannolis covers it all. The show’s syllabus is an ambitious journey through the rule of law, justice, and the nuances of pivotal trials.

In the first segment, Jim sheds light on major trials making headlines, including the recently concluded civil fraud trial in New York and the intriguing case of E Jean Carroll, the former president. Delve into the regulations governing corporations in the Big Apple and the implications for executive immunity under the Constitution.

Moving into the second hour, the focus shifts to the aftermath of the assault on democracy – the January 6 attack on the Capitol. Jim explores one of the 1,200 prosecutions, specifically the case of the Imantana fire chief involved in the riot. The federal criminal justice system takes center stage as the show dissects the ongoing legal battles.

Jim Santelle’s Saturday morning show is more than just news commentary; it’s a journey into the heart of justice and democracy. By examining these cases and their broader implications, Morning Cannolis aims to empower listeners to take action on issues affecting their lives in Wisconsin and beyond. Tune in for a compelling blend of insights, analysis, and a call to action.

An Insurrection's Anniversary

James Santelle — Sat, 06 Jan 2024 17:00:00 +0000

James Santelle kicks off the new year with a reflection on the somber anniversary of our nation’s near-upheaval in 2021 during the January 6th insurrection. As the long-lasting effects and the ongoing trials loom large over the upcoming election, James offers priceless insights into law, order, and that which really governs our nation.

Just the End of A Year

James Santelle — Sat, 30 Dec 2023 17:00:00 +0000

Join James Santelle in this cumulative episode after a long year in the realm of law, order, and justice, with an already ambitious year ahead.

Off The Ballot, On the Map

James Santelle — Sat, 23 Dec 2023 17:00:00 +0000

It seems that every day Jim’s not on air, world shattering news comes out. Thankfully, James Santelle comes to us for 2 hours each week to catch you up on all the happenings in the wild worlds of law, order, and justice.

In today’s onslaught – Trump’s been taken off the ballot in Colorado, fair maps have been put on the docket in Wisconsin, and the future under a second Trump administration if such a thing could come to pass.

Law and Governance Against Chaos

James Santelle — Sat, 16 Dec 2023 17:00:00 +0000

Join the insightful James Santelle, and his dedicated producer, Anya, for the 76th edition of Morning Cannoli! In this episode, we dive deep into the heart of crucial news stories, events, and happenings that shape the landscape of law and government.

This morning, we unravel the basic truths behind the headlines that animate our lives and livelihoods. Jim Santelle dissects the fundamental question: What happened with Rudy Gulianni? What will happen next if he and others indicted at present continue to disregard the law? Get ready for a compelling exploration of the latest news stories and their impact on our society.

🎧 Tune in and Stay Informed: Start your morning right with Morning Cannoli – the civic media show that empowers you to navigate the complexities of our world. Don’t miss out on the conversation, the insights, and the call to action. Subscribe now and be part of the informed citizenry!

Our 75th Episode!

James Santelle — Sat, 09 Dec 2023 17:00:00 +0000

Welcome to another engaging episode of Morning Cannolis with your host, James Santelle! In this two-hour powerhouse session, James delves into crucial global affairs during the first hour, offering insightful commentary on Russian war crimes and providing an in-depth analysis of the current state of the war in Ukraine.

In the second hour, buckle up for an intriguing program as James unpacks the enigmatic “2025 plan” – a compilation of the audacious statements made by Donald Trump about his potential actions if elected.

From international affairs to political intrigue, “Morning Cannolis” delivers a dynamic blend of information and analysis that keeps you informed and entertained throughout the entire two-hour broadcast.

Remembering Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor

James Santelle — Sat, 02 Dec 2023 17:00:00 +0000

In the first hour of the show, host Jim Santelle discusses the impact of the first woman to be appointed to the US Supreme Court, Sandra Day O’Connor, as well as how the recent decisions of the modern Court have affected her legacy. In the second hour, Jim gives an update on the status of Donald Trump’s legal woes and briefs the listeners on important cases coming up before the end of the year.

Get In Sync With Current Events

James Santelle — Sat, 25 Nov 2023 17:00:00 +0000

James Santelle joins us on this Thanksgiving weekend to extend a touching tribute to Rosalind Carter, a monumental figure alongside her husband Jimmy in the world of Eco-activism, policy, and frankly, making the world better.

What Can WE Do?

James Santelle — Sat, 18 Nov 2023 17:00:00 +0000

The resounding question is always asked when James Santelle speaks on the on-going injustices of our world and nation: What can we do? That and more answered today on Morning Canollis.

A Way Forward

James Santelle — Sat, 11 Nov 2023 17:00:00 +0000

Domestic Violence, Gun Violence and Judges’ Ethics. All these topics and more are in the hands of the Supreme Court. Taking their responses and decisions into his hands on our behalf is James Santelle, former US Attorney for SE Wisconsin, to explain, deliberate, and take your questions today on Morning Canollis.

Deterence and Discrimination

James Santelle — Sat, 04 Nov 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Join James Santelle for an insightful discussion in this special prerecorded episode, where we delve into this week’s litany of issues in the US and beyond. James Santelle provides a thoughtful perspective on the issue of antisemitism at Cornell University, shedding light on this important subject. He also discusses the ongoing Sam Bankman Fried and FTX Cryptop “conspiracy” case, as Jim has taken to calling it. Furthermore, we discuss Tyree Nichols’ ongoing wrongful death suit, delving into the complexities and implications surrounding this case. Tune in to gain valuable insights and engage in a respectful dialogue on these crucial issues.

Copyright, Conduct, and the Constitution

James Santelle — Sat, 28 Oct 2023 16:00:00 +0000

There’s a lot to cover this week as new rulings and more cases are added to the mounting national docket, but James Santelle is here to clear it!

War, Justice, and Gage Orders

James Santelle — Sat, 21 Oct 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Jim begins the hour discussing updates from the Middle East and the war between Israel and Hamas, along with a midwestern connection. Then the morning turns to updates in the legal challenges facing former President Donald Trump. Listeners share their questions on several legal aspects Jim discusses. Finally, the show covers updates going on in the election racketeering case ongoing in Georgia.

Examining Human Tragedy

James Santelle — Sat, 14 Oct 2023 16:00:00 +0000

War rages in Israel, Palestine, Russia, Ukraine, and across the globe. The impending choices of 14th amendment cases draws nearer. In 13 months, there will be another presidential election. It’s only early October, but things are pretty scary already here on Morning Cannolis.

Case by Case

James Santelle — Sat, 07 Oct 2023 16:00:00 +0000

In a rare, prerecorded episode, James Santelle is covering the most pressing matters regarding the Trump Family’s status as New York Buisness owners, ADA testing trials and more.

Ends of Eras

James Santelle — Sat, 30 Sep 2023 16:00:00 +0000

🎙️ Welcome to “Morning Cannolis” with your host, James Santelle! In this episode, we’re diving deep into the currents of current affairs to bring you a captivating blend of stories that matter.

First up, we dissect the ongoing Alabama redistricting case, unpacking the intricate web of politics and democracy. James Santelle offers sharp insights and expert analysis to help you navigate this crucial issue.

Then, we shift gears to explore a decades-long mystery: the arrest of the man responsible for the murder of Tupac Shakur 24 years ago. Join us as we peel back the layers of this captivating story, revealing the shocking revelations and lingering questions.

Finally, we pay tribute to the late Senator Diane Feinstein, whose impactful career has left an indelible mark on American politics. James reflects on her legacy and explores the implications of her passing.

An Impending Shutdown

James Santelle — Sat, 23 Sep 2023 16:00:00 +0000

By this time next week, the Federal Government may be forced to shut down. Why? I don’t know, I’m just a podcast description. James Santelle is the one with all the information, you should listen to him tell you!

To Ensure Security

James Santelle — Sat, 16 Sep 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Getting back to the weeks major issues, including the charges against Hunter Biden, the happenings of Trump’s cases, and more.

Indicted and In Trouble

James Santelle — Sat, 09 Sep 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Where are the leaders of January 6th now? Soon, behind bars. This is Morning Canollis!

Sentences on Sentencing

James Santelle — Sat, 02 Sep 2023 16:00:00 +0000

After several huge sentences come down on even more Jan 6th rioters, James Santelle is break down their meanings, the terms, and the reactions of the plaintiffs now that Trump’s support seems to have waned.

Looking for a Way Forward

James Santelle — Sat, 26 Aug 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Georgia, DC, Germany, Milwaukee. Across the world, justice is afoot. James Santelle is here to bring it all together.

The Rule of Law Against the Rule of Trump

James Santelle — Sat, 19 Aug 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Jim. is. BACK! And better than ever, if you can believe it. All your requests for him to cover the insane last two weeks of news have been answered!

Indictment Catchup

James Santelle — Sat, 12 Aug 2023 16:00:00 +0000

We might be prerecorded, but we’re no phoning it in. James Santelle is back with some of the hardest hitting news America has faced since we came to air. Tune in!

What The Cameras Saw At Mar-A-Lago

James Santelle — Sat, 29 Jul 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Hall and Oates tried to warn you: Private Eyes, they are watching you. At least, if you’re the former president Donald Trump. This is just a place holder until Jim writes the far more elegant write-up, but in the meantime listen to this episode of Morning Cannoli’s to get up-to-date on the everchanging state of indictments against Trump and others.

Notes from Across the Parking Lot of America's Halls of Law

James Santelle — Sat, 22 Jul 2023 16:00:00 +0000

No one seems interested in getting the Supreme Court justices to accept a code of ethics. No one, that is, except James Santelle, Attorney Extraordinaire, here to bring attention to the issue facing the United States through the lens of outcoming court decisions .

Recaps and Moving Forward

James Santelle — Sat, 15 Jul 2023 16:00:00 +0000

It’s Saturday in America, and you know what that means. It means former US Attorney James Santelle is catching you up on the Supreme Court, International Affairs, and the aftermath of January 6th Insurrection.

Ethics and Civics and More

James Santelle — Sat, 08 Jul 2023 16:00:00 +0000

James Santelle wraps up this last month of Supreme Court rulings and more this week on Morning Cannoli’s.

Four Major Supreme Court Decisions of the Week : Defining the High Tribunal and Significantly Reconfiguring America

James Santelle — Sat, 01 Jul 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Resuming our traditional “This Day in History” segment, we begin with
recollections of the catastrophic events of July 4, 2022—in which a young man,
using an assault weapon and a high-capacity magazine, fired 70 rounds of
ammunition into a crowd of Independence Day parade-goers in Highland Park,
causing the deaths of seven and injuries to many more. Pondering again the heath
care, Rule of Law, and societal-cultural crises that gun violence in America
continues to promote, a brief restatement of those experience-tested policy actions
that should be pursued in remedial response—in addition to the court-specific
things that followed the Illinois tragedy: Not only charging the shooter with
various criminal charges, including first-degree murder, but also alleging that his
father unlawfully signed his son’s application for the firearms several years earlier,
knowing of the shooter’s instability and threats of violence—and similarly seeking
damages against the weapon manufacturer, Smith & Wesson, for intentionally
marketing its products to youth through a campaign that glorifies military combat.
Then, in this second of a three-arc series of broadcasts on the meaning and import
of the most significant Supreme Court cases of this term, a brief review of four
major rulings of recent weeks—before turning to the landmark, geography-altering
decisions announced in the last days of this week. Those include: (1) A unanimous
order in an employee challenge to the Postal Service’s declination to accommodate
his religious commitment not to work on Sundays (not granting his request but
heightening the legal standard for review of it); (2) A split-decision ruling
overturning 40 years of judicial precedent and prohibiting public and private
universities nationwide from considering race in their reviews of the candidacies of
potential student enrollees; (3) A similarly divisive opinion invalidating the
President’s student loan forgiveness initiative for some 40 million potential
beneficiaries as inconsistent with the “major questions doctrine” (also explained in
the broadcast); and (4) A third no-less-controversial ruling in favor of a wedding
website provider who alleged a violation of her free speech rights in the potential
application to her business of a Colorado law prohibiting commercial
discrimination against same-sex couples, among other immutable characteristics.
In response to the questions and comments of many listeners, calling to express
concerns about and objections to these Supreme Court decisions, the broadcast
concludes with general observations about the implications of them for

contemporary America—and for the generations ahead. [Note: In the third series
in this arc, that “assessment of the term” discussion continues, revisiting the
meaning of these landmark opinions and several others announced just recently.]

A Discussion All About the United States Supreme Court: Evaluating the Dramatic Importance of Four Recent Decisions—and (With Listener Callers) Reaffirming the Immediate Need for an Omnibus Code of Ethic

James Santelle — Sat, 24 Jun 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Beginning the next significant series of broadcasts during this important time in the annual history of our High Court—when, consistent with tradition, its Members release their major decisions, including explanatory opinions, tempering concurrences, and increasingly vitriolic dissents. And observing the one-year anniversary of the landmark decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization—overturning nearly half a century of constitutionally-embedded rights to reproductive services, sending decision-making on abortion into what has become a patchwork of laws and inconsistent rulings throughout the states, and arguably opening up the door to revisiting other, long-established privacy rights guaranteed to all Americans. (This commentary includes reporting on the practical consequences of the Roe v. Wade reversal, including increases in violence visited upon health care providers and the still-pending controversy over the nationwide accessibility of mifepristone, the principal drug previously authorized as medically safe by the Food & Drug Administration in abortion and miscarriage treatments.)
Then reviewing and explaining the significance of these four, major rulings—each of which provides reason to be hopeful about the future of the Republic, focusing on the individual rights, prerogatives, and histories of its diverse people: (1) Affirming the legislatively-established right of the Secretary of Homeland Security to use limited resources to investigate and deport those illegal immigrants who pose the greatest threat to national security and local safety; (2) Confirming the long-settled meaning and power of the Voting Rights Act in prohibiting racially-based gerrymandering that denies congressional representation to people of color; (3) Upholding the constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act to safeguard the heritage of the youngest members of our indigenous populations in adoption, placement, and custody proceedings in our state courts; and (4) Validating the right of nursing home patients to sue for mistreatment under traditional civil rights principles and the foundations of our Medicaid (and Medicare) programs.
Finally, examining the latest instance of ethical lapses by our Supreme Court—this time involving the high-priced travel of Associate Justice Samuel Alito to an Alaskan fishing site, provided by a conservative political donor who also benefited from at least one High Court decision ultimately resulting in a $2 billion judgment in his favor: That—and previous reporting about the conflicts of interest (familial and financial) presented by Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, prompting the Senate Judiciary Committee to vote (after Independence Day) on pending legislation imposing a code of ethical standards and recusal guidelines on all SCOTUS members—like the rules for hundreds of other federal judges.
[Note: Expecting two more “decision days” in the coming business week, next Saturday’s broadcast will also focus almost exclusively a review of those rulings.]

The Federal Grand Jury Indictment of Donald JohnTrump: Reviewing & Assessing an Historic Document in American History

James Santelle — Sat, 10 Jun 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Starting our second year on the broadcast networks of Civic Media with one of the
most significant events ever in law, government, and the aspiration for justice in
America—namely, the first time in our nation’s history that a former President has
been charged with federal crimes. Focusing on the 38 allegations against him and
his assistant-bodyguard for withholding national defense information, concealing
the possession of classified documents, engaging in a conspiracy to obstruct
justice, and making false statements to the federal agents investigating the case.
Commentary highlighting, first, the significant national security threat described in
the indictment—including exposure to individuals (and arguably even large groups
of people) of the secrets of some of our most critical federal agencies, assigned
responsibility both domestically and overseas with keeping us safe. As a principal,
companion theme in the charging document—historical and recent confirmation
(virtually all from the mouth of the former President himself) confirming his
appreciation for the nature of the classified documents, his knowledge that his
retention and display of them is prohibited, his intent in taking them from the
White House and retaining them at Mar-a-Lago, and his contempt for the system of
rules and protocols that he understood and affirmatively chose to disregard.
Among the oral recitations of highly incriminating behavioral accounts in the
indictment, conversations (recorded and committed to writing) between Donald
Trump and various media members, PAC representatives, and personal staff—all
revealing bold and brazen conduct—along with the directed movements of the
many boxes in and throughout his resort residence, most tellingly in an attempt to
prevent his own attorney from identifying, reporting on, and disgorging them to the
requesting offices of the United States long before the infamous search warrant of
August of 2022. All of that and other alleged criminal conduct prompting
substantive lies and false statements to the Justice Department and its agents.
Finally, in response to spectacularly insightful questions of callers, observations
and perspectives on the venue-related reason for charging in South Florida, the
likely trappings of the arraignment and plea hearing of the coming week, and the
likely obligations of the government prosecutors to offer to the trial jury an
explanation of why the former President acted as he did—perhaps out of raw
arrogance and unbridled bravado, all to the harm of our nation and its security.

[Next week: Follow up observations on the criminal prosecution, along with
commentary on the significant decisions of the Supreme Court in recent days.]

Observing the 50th Broadcast: One Year of Programs Including ‘Rule of Law in Snapshots’ and ‘Undiscovered Justice’ Segments

James Santelle — Sat, 03 Jun 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Expressions of appreciation for the listening audience and especially on-air callers
for supporting the mission and goal of this show—that is, reviewing, analyzing,
and discussing the most significant weekly news stories in the realms of law,
government, and the aspiration for justice in America. Consistently asking (and
answering) three pivotal questions—namely, what do we know?; why is it
important?; and how may we respond, react, and answer to those events?
This week, beginning with “Undiscovered Justice” observations about the
President’s major decision to safeguard the future of Native American heritage
properties in New Mexico—and about the decision by the Attorney General to
enforce environmental/land protections in West Virginia through the initiation of a
civil lawsuit seeking civil penalties against a major coal industry consortium.
Followed by analysis of the legal trappings behind the decision of the Justice
Department to close the investigation—absent any criminal or civil
action—involving former Vice President Mike Pence and his possession of certain
official documents at his personal residence in Indiana; that includes an in-depth
explanation of the policies and practices of DOJ in its all-important evaluation of
investigative findings and its (occasional) announcement of “no prosecution”
decisions. Turning then to the continuing flurry of rulings by the United States
Supreme Court—focusing on a major labor union decision permitting a
Washington cement company to pursue claims against strikers in state court instead
of through the National Labor Relations Board and a second critical ruling on the
intent necessary to prosecute civilly two grocery store-pharmaceutical providers
for their allegedly fraudulent submission of false claims to the Medicaid and
Medicare programs (one of two matters from our own 7 th Circuit Appeals Court).
Then, in a new segment, “Rule of Law Snapshots,” updates on significant stories
from past broadcasts—including the dramatic prison sentences imposed on the
Oath Keepers for their incitement of violence on January 6; the opening statements
in the federal hate crimes murder prosecution in Pittsburgh, based upon the killings
of 11 and the injuries to others at the Tree of Life Synagogue there; the vote in the
Texas Legislature to impeach (charge) incumbent State Attorney General Ken
Paxton with obstruction of justice and abuse of office; and the continuing litigation
of claims between the Disney Companies and Florida Governor Ron

DeSantis—focusing on the integrity-based and justice-affirming decision of the
federal judge presiding over a Frist Amendment lawsuit to recuse himself—based
upon his self-reporting that a relative in his extended family owns some shares of
Disney stock.
[Note: In this month of major rulings once again expected from the Supreme
Court, future broadcasts to include important summaries and analyses of them.]

“Historical Events in the Week’s News—IncludingRemarks and Decisions by the Supreme Court, Dramatic Abortion & ImpeachmentActions in the State Courts, and Severe Sentences Imposed on January 6 Rioters”

James Santelle — Sat, 27 May 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Starting the final broadcast of our first year on the Civic Media airwaves with a
special segment of “What Happened Today in History”—highlighting the return in
1994 of Russian dissident and Nobel Prize Winner Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn to the
Soviet Union (after the dismissal of criminal charges against him) and the 1935
decision of the United States Supreme Court invalidating President Roosevelt’s
National Industrial Recovery Act (a pivotal component of his omnibus New Deal
package to reinvigorate the nation’s crippled industrial/labor/economic
status)—both of which are reflected subtly in the Rule of Law news of this past
week.
In that focus, critical examination of Chief Justice John Roberts’ public remarks
about the challenges and reputation of the High Court; the equally troubling
commentary of Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch condemning the government’s
attempts to promote community health during the pandemic; and (arguably most
important) the landmark decision of a nominally unanimous SCOTUS that restricts
dramatically the capacity of the Environmental Protection Agency to enforce the
Clean Water Act—finding that its reach extends only to only those waterways
“adjoining” as opposed to “adjacent” to covered areas (much like the High Court’s
ruling last year that limited significantly the enforcement of the Clean Air Act).
Addressing other reporting in the category of “delivery of justice,” the decision by
a South Carolina state court judge to suspend (likely temporarily) the legislative
action of the government one day earlier to limit abortion access to only the first
six weeks of pregnancy (when most women are unaware of their medical status);
the impending vote of the Texas House of Representatives to impeach the
incumbent Attorney General, Kenneth Paxton, for bribery, corruption, and abuse of
office; and the decision of successful litigant E. Jean Carroll to seek to augment her
recent $5 million defamation/assault judgment against Donald Trump, based upon
his most recent, additional claims that her claims were fabricated and fraudulent.
Finally, an in-depth review of the most significant sentencings to date of
defendants convicted of seditious conspiracy and other violent crimes for their
insurrectionist attack on the United States Capitol on January 6—including Oath
Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes (18 years) and three of his principal deputies
(ranging from 12 years to 4 years); central to that discussion, the insightful and

revelatory comments of the sentencing judge about the conduct and the personal
histories of the attackers, including one who (as he remarked) should have been a
role model for Americans instead of the disgraced actor that she has become.

All Things Supreme Court: Explorations of Education, Copyright, the Internet, Abortion, and the 14th Amendment

James Santelle — Sat, 20 May 2023 16:00:00 +0000

In substitution of the fairly routine invocation and description of significant
events on the broadcast “Day in History,” opening this time with two
landmark occurrences in recent human history—beginning with the 75 th
anniversary of the creation of the modern state of Israel (and the reactions to
it, both civilian and military, in the decades since then), followed by an analysis
of the 49-year-old decision of the United States Supreme Court in Brown v.
Board of Education, establishing for the first time in our nation’s history that
separate educational facilities in our nation’s public schools are inherently
unequal (and thus overtly unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment).
Turning then to no-less-significant contemporary developments at the bench
of our present High Court—including a major ruling in intellectual property
doctrines, finding that Andy Warhol did, in fact, violate the copyright in a
professional photograph of music legend Prince by transforming that image
into another artistic style for publication in the public domain. And, in
another landmark ruling, a unanimous Court concluded that neither an anti-
terrorism law nor an electronic communications statute provides a basis for
the families of victims killed in ISIS attacks in Istanbul and Paris to recover
damages against the online social media providers on whose sites various
indoctrinating messaging was placed. Then, announcements by the Justices
that, in their next term, they will be turning to disputes about the entitlement
of the Congress to information about the property interests of former
President Trump in his hotel in Washington, D.C.—along with yet another
challenge to the racial gerrymandering of state legislatures (this one, in
South Carolina) that allegedly disenfranchised voters of color.
In the wake of the decisions of last Summer by the High Court overruling
Roe v. Wade and of this past Spring addressing but not resolving the
challenge to the abortion and miscarriage drug mifepristone, a description of
the oral argument on the second of those related topics (now on remand)
before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit—all but
certainly presaging a ruling prohibiting the Food & Drug Administration
from authorizing the use of that pharmaceutical nationwide. Finally, some
outstanding discussion with broadcast callers about ethics, honesty,
consistency, and commitment to public service—as reflected in the
challenging news of our times and, in particular, the present inter-
governmental dispute about the federal debt ceiling and the current

discussion about options for invoking the obscure “public debt” provision of
the Fourteenth Amendment in (arguable if not doubtful) justification of
unilateral executive action to remedy the present governmental stalemate.

From England to Pakistan to America’s Southwest Border—Government in Action, as that also Affects Our Basic Notions about Second Amendment Rights, Elections, and Court Litigation

James Santelle — Sat, 13 May 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Reflecting, first, on the Rule of Law overseas—including the abiding
tradition of the United Kingdom to support and, at least in part, serve under
a monarch (as witnessed in the coronation of King Charles III), long rejected
by our nation’s founding fathers in favor of what was, 234 years ago, a
completely novel form of checks and balances among three discrete
branches of a national government (including a most non-royal President).
Commenting, too, on the unrelated but equally compelling accounts of Rule
of Law challenges in Pakistan, as a former Prime Minister is arrested and
then released at the direction of the country’s Supreme Court—even as the
incumbent Prime Minister wrestles with violent public protests nationwide.
Back at home, the dramatic return to the traditional, pre-pandemic
processing of foreign nationals along our southwest border, seeking asylum
from the nations of their origin—and the justice-invoking challenges
attendant upon that for our beleaguered immigration courts and judges.
Next, some updated reporting on one of the principal topics of two weeks
ago—namely, the challenges to our national health and well-being posed by
our gun culture and violent uses of firearms in virtually every area of our
lives (including a recent decision by a federal judge invalidating legislated
restrictions on age requirements for gun purchasers). In connection with the
January 6 insurrection, two important, justice-related stories—the first in
anticipation of the late May sentencing of former Oath Keepers leader
Stewart Rhodes upon his conviction for seditious conspiracy, and the second
(right here in Wisconsin) from the directive of a Dane County Circuit Judge,
compelling the Wisconsin Election Commission to vote again (absent the
involvement of one member) on whether to penalize the State’s fake electors
for their fraudulent and illegal conduct in attempting to overturn the
legitimate Electoral College counting in the 2020 Presidential election.
Among the many other, Rule of Law stories from the week, another
discussion of the defamation and assault trial in which reporter-commentator
E. Jean Carroll sought damages against the former President, along with the
issuance of criminal charges against New York representative George Santos
for a combination of banking-financial, campaign-related, and false
statements behaviors. Finally, in anticipation of the series of timely
broadcasts just ahead, a revisiting of the overwhelming ethical challenges

now before our Supreme Court—even as it decides important cases (among
them, the contemporary meaning of our Constitution’s commerce clause in
application to pork-selling mandates imposed by the State of California).

Music, Insurrection, Defamation, Classified Documents, Disney, Death Penalties, and High Court Ethics

James Santelle — Sat, 06 May 2023 16:00:00 +0000

In another invocation of our (occasional special) segment entitled
“Undiscovered Justice,” stories of our times at the intersection of popular
music, intellectual property, and judicial intervention—examining the civil
court action brought by the estate of the late, great song stylist Marvin Gaye
against current popular musician Ed Sheeran, based on allegations that the
latter stole a core series of musical notes from the former in his creative song
writing: This, in exposition of the accessible and important topics with
which our trial courts (positioned jurisdictionally below our Supreme Court)
wrestle on a daily basis—affecting not only the arts but our popular
reactions to them. Also observing the significance (and marginal law-related
aspects of two cultural traditions overseas and here at home—namely, the
coronation in Great Britain of King Charles III and the nearly
contemporaneous “running” of the Kentucky Derby at Churchill Downs.)
Necessarily returning to the latest developments in the investigations of the
January 6 insurrection at our nation’s Capitol, the start of the Proud Boys
seditious conspiracy trial; the imposition of the highest sentence to
date—that is, 14 years imprisonment—on one of the on-the-ground, violent
rioters; and the continuing work of a Fulton County prosecutor and Atlanta-
based grand jury determining whether the criminal laws of Georgia were
broken in the attempts by Donald Trump and others to overturn the popular
and thus the electoral votes for the Presidency in the aftermath of the 2020
election.
Turning then to an evidentiary review of the key developments in the
defamation/sexual assault trial based on civil allegations made by E. Jean
Carroll in a federal trial court in Manhattan—including the resurrection of
the so-called “Access Hollywood” tape, testimony by friends of the plaintiff
and others similarly assaulted by the (then future) President and other
corroborating support (namely, the defendant’s misidentification of a key
photograph of himself and what he thought was his former spouse). Adding
to the legal woes now faced by Donald Trump, more damning reporting
about his unauthorized and unlawful taking, retention, and perhaps even use
of confidential/classified documents to and at his resort in Mar-a-Lago. All
of that going on while, in that same state of Florida, its Governor, Ron
DeSantis, and the top executives (and former and past members of the Board

of Directors) of the Disney Companies continue to spar over operational
rights through competing civil cases litigated in the federal and state courts.
Finally, in our continuing focus on the United States Supreme Court,
reporting on a much under-reported decision about the imposition of the
death penalty—along with the seemingly never-ending ethics revelations
(most involving Associate Justice Clarence Thomas) that continue to
undermine the integrity and shake the confidence of the American people in
the highest court in the land. (Of course, much more on all of that in the
coming broadcasts, including especially those in late May and throughout
June, as the Supreme Court issues its most significant rulings of this term.)

“Of Hate Crimes, National Secrets Disclosures,Seditious Conspiracy, Grand Jury Testimony, Civil Defamation, RacialGerrymandering, the Death Penalty, and Remedies to Our Gun Violence”

James Santelle — Sat, 29 Apr 2023 16:00:00 +0000

In the first hour, an omnibus sweep of the great flurry of news stories in the arenas of law enforcement, judicial activity, and the delivery (however imperfect) of justice in America—beginning with the start of the Tree of Life Synagogue hate crimes trial in Pittsburgh, effectively assigned to the jury the decision of whether the death penalty should be imposed on the defendant for his malicious and intentional slaughters of and injuries to many Jews celebrating their faith. Following that, a review of the federal Espionage Act charges against 21-year-old Massachusetts airman Jack Teixeira for his theft and online posting of our nation’s military secrets; consideration of the merits of the pending “seditious conspiracy” trial of Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio and others for their incitement of the violence witnessed at the United States Capitol; and analysis of the unprecedented, compelled grand jury testimony of former Vice President Mike Pence, principally focusing on his tumultuous conversations with the former chief executive in the days leading up to and on January 6. Complementing interactive listener discussions of those and other topics are examinations of the civil trial being litigated by former columnist and journalist E. Jean Carroll for alleged sexual assault and defamation at the hands of Donald Trump; the reversal by the North Carolina Supreme Court of its earlier decision (now on appeal to the Supreme Court) on charges that congressional district line-drawing in some areas of the state accomplished an unconstitutional “gerrymander” disenfranchising black voters; and the legislative changes in Florida law, permitting juries to impose the death penalty even if their numbers are not unanimous (in unmistakable response to the Marjory Stoneman Douglas “life sentence” of recent times). Then, in the second major movement of the broadcast, an inventory of the continuing firearms-related violence in America—including the latest “mass shootings” in places throughout our nation and the overwhelming sentiment of our population in support of rational, reasonable, and effective restrictions, limitations, and conditions on the manufacture, sale, transfer, possession, carry, and use of guns in the 21 st Century. As a significant addendum to that chilling rendition, an outline of some of the many things that can and should be pursued to keep us safer and more secure—including but not limited to universal background checks, extreme risk protection orders, assault weapons, and high volume magazine bans, and enforced standards for maintaining guns in our personal residences—all experience- based remedies available to our national, state, and even local legislators.

Remembering the First Earth Day in 1970—and Assessing the Latest Developments in the National Debates on Abortion,Defamation, Espionage, Judicial Ethics, and Legislative Expulsions

James Santelle — Sat, 22 Apr 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Following a return to our now-traditional “What Happened Today in (Often Rule
of Law-Related) History,” examination and explanation of the just-issued decision
by the United States Supreme Court, effectively reversing (if only for now) the
findings of lower federal courts removing access to the abortion and miscarriage
drug, mifepristone. Discussion of what is next in this continuing post-Dobbs v.
Reproductive Services debate, including oral argument scheduled for mid-May in
the Fifth Circuit Appeals Court on the merits of the challenge to the Food & Drug
Administration’s safety assessment and medical authorization of 25 years ago.
Then addressing the other, landmark, court-related event of the week—that is, the
12 th hour monetary settlement of the defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion
Voting Machines against Fox News: An exposition of the three, major pretrial
rulings announced by the presiding judge in Delaware—all unfavorable to the
defense against claims of “actual malice” in false reporting that the 2020
Presidential election was “stolen” and that the plaintiff’s voting devices were
responsible for accomplishing nationwide fraud. Accompanying that, some fact-
based speculation on the reasons why Fox News chose to pay nearly $ 800 million
in damages rather than proceed to a jury trial that certainly would have seen the
difficult and deception-revealing testimony of some of its principal broadcasters
and, no less important, its news-directing owner and operator, Rupert Murdoch.
In other significant justice-related developments of the week, updated, additional
understanding about the recently-initiated criminal case against Airman Jack
Teixeira for disclosing classified documents and national security information to
his 50-member, on-line chat group called “Thug Shaker Center”—including the
scheduling results of a mid-week hearing in a Massachusetts federal court. And
prompted by some outstanding questions and comments from many audience
members calling into the discussion, a further examination of the abundant ethics
problems now facing Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence
Thomas—including his conflicts of interest with the public advocacies and
political work of his spouse and, more recently, revelations of his failures to
disclose significant gifts and compensation (both monetary and travel-related)
given to him throughout his tenure on the High Court bench: All of that again

compelling the need for an omnibus ethics code, imposed by the Justices
themselves or the Congress.
[Note: Invoking the recent events in Tennessee and other places of recent gun-
related violence, next week’s broadcast will return to reporting on the health crisis
prompted by firearms use in America—and what we can and should do about that.]

A Flurry of Civil and Criminal Litigation

James Santelle — Sat, 15 Apr 2023 16:00:00 +0000

At a time of inter-faith observance of Ramadan, Passover, and Easter among our
fellow Muslim, Jewish, and Christian residents, respectively, another broadcast on
“Undiscovered Justice”—this time, focusing on the celebration of Vaisakhi by
members of Sikh congregations throughout our state, nation, and world. A
description of the historical development of the 500-year-old faith, now
commemorating both the community harvest and the establishment of the
foundational principles of this fifth largest religion—namely, justice, service,
equality, and magnanimity; in the wake of the hate crimes violence at the Oak
Creek Gurdwara in August of 2012, reporting on the Rule of Law-related lessons
and behaviors that followed—including significant changes in criminal justice
reporting, new educational and learning opportunities, and other employment- and
community-wide understandings of and appreciations for diversity and inclusion.
Then an updated exposition of the nationwide discussion (inside and outside the
federal courts) of mifepristone—approved some 25 years ago by the Food & Drug
Administration for medical abortion and miscarriage treatments. Special attention
to the interim ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit,
continuing to make the drug available but turning back certain agency protocols on
mailing and non-physician prescription—all the target of an “emergency
application” by the Biden/Garland Administration to the United States Supreme
Court, seeking prompt review and reversal of the rulings of the lower court judges.
Beyond but much-related to the pending criminal charges against former President
Donald Trump in New York (Manhattan) State Court, a flood of other litigation
(both criminal and civil) prosecuted, defended, or otherwise involving public
figures on the national stage—including District Attorney Alvin Bragg, House
Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, New York Attorney General Letitia James,
journalist E. Jean Carroll, and former lawyer/“fixer” Michael Cohen, among
others. In the national security arena, the announcement of federal criminal
charges against a Massachusetts Air National Guardsman for posting on line
certain classified documents and national security secrets—principally but not
exclusively about the war in Ukraine: What that means and where that goes.
Finally, commentary anticipating next week the start of the major defamation trial
against Fox News, prosecuted civilly by Dominion Voting Machines that seeks
monetary damages for the knowing misstatements and overt lies broadcast by the

network about the legitimacy of the 2020 Presidential election—and the role (also
falsely stated) that the machines allegedly played in accomplishing that “fraud.”

Of Privacy-Reproductive Rights, the State Indictment of a former President, and Large Personal Gifts to a Supreme Court Justice

James Santelle — Sat, 08 Apr 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Beginning this broadcast with another supremely “late breaking” story, our focused
exposition and in-depth analysis of two overtly “competing” decisions from the
federal courts—both affecting the broad right to privacy and its especially
important application to reproductive/abortion rights: In the Northern District of
Texas, a trial judge finding inadequate, unsupported, and invalid the Food & Drug
Administration’s quarter-century-old decision approving the drug mifepristone for
use in abortion services and miscarriage treatments. But in the Eastern District of
Washington, another federal judicial officer explicitly directs the FDA to ensure
access to and distribution of that same drug—in some 17 states nationwide whose
Attorneys General brought the civil action. Making sense of the specific
implications of this latest, predictable post-Dobbs battle over reproductive
rights—along with the no-less-significant concerns that other drugs long approved
by the federal government and used uneventfully for all sorts of health-related
reasons might also be adjudged off-limits—even as the Biden-Garland Justice
Department challenges the legitimacy of the Texas judgment in the Fifth Circuit
Appeals Court.
In the immediate aftermath of yet another “first” in American history, a review of
the 34-count criminal indictment returned by a grand jury in New York, charging
former President Donald Trump with falsifying business records to accomplish
felony violations of federal and state election and tax laws. At the center of the
state prosecution by the Manhattan District Attorney are three discrete events in
which Trump allegedly paid two women to remain quiet about their accounts of
extramarital affairs with him many years ago, along with another claim by a
building doorman that Trump fathered a child out of wedlock. Those payments,
along with phony invoices and equally false accounting records, form the basis for
what prosecutors describe as a criminal scheme “to hide damaging information
from the voting public.” Explanations of what happens next in the case assigned to
a Manhattan trial judge, who scheduled another case hearing for early December.
Finally, in a return to the work and activity, both on the bench and off, of the
United States Supreme Court, a review of the revelations that Associate Justice
Clarence Thomas took lavish vacations, valued in hundreds of thousands of
dollars, at the invitation of a Texas real estate billionaire. Analysis of why that
past conduct, now known by the American public, is important to understanding

the disclosure obligations, past and present, of the Justices—along with the abiding
need for the imposition upon them of an omnibus new code of judicial ethics.

Introducing a New Segment, ‘Undiscovered Justice,' Highlighting the Rule of Law Lessons of an Under-Reported News Story

James Santelle — Sat, 01 Apr 2023 16:00:00 +0000

At the start of the broadcast, the first of what will be semi-regular segments
featuring justice-focused news that, for various reasons, has not received the media
and public attention that it rightly deserves—this week, turning our attention to
what millions of Israeli citizens have been and continue to pursue in their protests
against the anti-judicial proposals of the Prime Minister. The opening segment
includes an exposition of precisely what Benjamin Netanyahu hopes to accomplish
in compromising the independence of the Israeli Courts (including the Supreme
Court) through political interference in everything from the partisan selection of
justices to party-inspired overturning of judicial decisions. Answering the
question, “What are you prepared to do to preserve your nation and its foundations
in the Rule of Law?,” the Israeli populace revolted (peaceably), prompting the
Prime Minister to “suspend” his plan—actions that, as discussed in the broadcast,
communicate important messages and lessons to the people of the United States.
Turning then to the major (if substantively premature) news item in America, a
description of both the anticipated content and likely procedural trappings of the
criminal indictment returned this past week by a grand jury reviewing evidence
that former President Donald Trump violated New York financial laws in paying
“hush money” to women with whom he allegedly had affairs in advance of the
2016 presidential election. Responding to the insightful and focused questions of
program callers, an exposition of the fundamental components of our criminal
justice system, along with a prediction about the chronology and movement of the
pretrial, jury trial, conviction/sentencing, and appellate proceedings just ahead.
After that, an analysis of the recent lawsuit filed against the Norfolk Southern
Railway Company by the Justice Department, seeking the recovery of “clean-up’
costs and fees under the Clean Water Act, in the wake of the disastrous train
derailment and environmental contamination in East Palestine, Ohio. And, in
Texas, the major ruling by a federal judge that a significant if not core component
of the Affordable Care Act, also known as “ObamaCare,” mandating that insurance
companies provide patient-clients with healthy-preserving forms of preventive care
and treatment, is unconstitutional—a ruling now on appeal to a higher federal
court. Finally, the start of analysis of a story in our nation’s continuing post-Dobbs
debate over privacy-reproductive rights—this one from the New Mexico Supreme
Court, in a decision blocking local ordinances prohibiting abortion services.

The 40th Broadcast: The Rule of Law in America

James Santelle — Sat, 25 Mar 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Beginning with an updating analysis of some among the many, diverse criminal investigations and civil actions involving former President Donald Trump—including the campaign “hush money” scheme of 2016 being pursued by the Manhattan District Attorney, the election fraud and voting interference efforts in Georgia being led by the Fulton County District Attorney, the $250 million lawsuit against Trump family members and their business based upon financial fraud and wrongfully-stated property valuations, and the sweeping, bifurcated investigation by the Justice Department into Trump’s inciting the insurrection and attempting to stop the electoral college vote count and his taking and retention of classified and other official government documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort residence. Embedded into those accounts are three recent judicial decisions—finding that executive privilege does not prevent the former White House Chief of Staff from testifying about criminal conversations, that attorney-client privilege does not preclude like testimony from a past and present lawyer representing the former president, and that the fundamental tenets of procedural justice do not warrant the further postponement of the jury trial in the civil fraud action being prosecuted by the New York Attorney General, now confirmed to begin in October of this year.

As always, entertaining thoughtful questions and insightful perspectives from listener-callers, including one noting the continuing, incendiary comments and behaviors of the former president in response to the increasingly aggressive legal troubles he faces—including his promises of “death and destruction” and his not-veiled but overt threats against prosecutors and investigators; all of that affirming the long-standing limits of First Amendment free speech rights—not extending to incitement to violence or enticement to criminal behavior by actors taking up that “call” and mistakenly believing that it is righteous and just. As additional illustrations of that catastrophic trend, a summary and explanation of three of the latest criminal sentences of imprisonment imposed on the January 6 Capitol rioters, along with the recent criminal convictions of four more members of the anti-government, white nationalist “Oath Keepers,” also for insurrectionist conduct.

Finally, some reporting on a “low visibility” but significant Supreme Court decision invoking the legal concept of “vacatur” in the midst of our nation’s continuing post-Dobbs debate and challenge over privacy/reproductive rights—along with the “teaser” (to be continued next week) of another major High Court review of the treaty-water rights of the Navajo Nation in our western states.

Civics from the Wisconsin Grassroots Network: Hate Crimes, Policing Misconduct, and Legal Concepts of Crime-Fraud, Absolute Immunity, Investigative Non-Disclosure, Dual Sovereignty, and Judicial Review

James Santelle — Sat, 18 Mar 2023 16:00:00 +0000

Broadcasting live from one of the state’s most important gatherings of civic leaders, advocates, and residents concerned about and motivated to act to protect the foundations of our free, embracing, and forward-looking society, another in the series of discussions of the important news items of our times—as understood through the informing lens of civics, law, and government. Beginning with an exposition of the recent reporting by the Federal Bureau of Investigation about shocking increases in hate crimes in America (and what engaged citizens can and should do about that destructive trend)—followed by another Justice Department report on the unconstitutional, illegal, and anti-community conduct of members of the Louisville, Kentucky Police Department, as conducted in the aftermath of the shooting of Breonna Taylor in 2020 and the gathering of evidence of uses of excessive force, invalid searches, unlawful detentions, and racist behaviors.

In the midst of reports of anticipated state criminal prosecutions against Donald Trump, updates on some aspects of the federal investigations—focusing on the invocation of the “crime-fraud exception” to the attorney-client privilege to compel testimony by the lawyer of the former President; a rejection of “absolute immunity” for his incendiary statements on the Ellipse prior to the January 6 insurrection; and a similar rebuff by the Attorney General to new committee chairs in the House of Representatives seeking information about the status of on-going grand jury and other criminal investigations allegedly (and absurdly) “weaponizing” the federal government against conservative politicians and groups.

Tracking the always-developing efforts of state leaders to roll back privacy interests by further limiting access to reproductive rights, a report on the first legislative prohibition (in Wyoming) on the use of long-approved drugs in abortion procedures—along with updates on an expected, medical-related ruling by a federal judge in Texas and the “bookend” initiatives in states like Minnesota and Michigan to re-establish and preserve historically-embraced reproductive options. Finally, examination of the “dual sovereignty doctrine” permitting the federal prosecution of a defendant previously pardoned by a state governor; the significance of a warrant for the arrest of Russian President Putin (and one of his aides) for kidnapping and deporting Ukrainian children; and the similarly threatening behavior of the Mexican President in promoting and accomplishing a dramatic diminution in that country’s previously-independent commission overseeing and monitoring voting, elections, and the democratic process.

All Things SCOTUS (Part Three): Ethics Challenges, Review Denials, Oral Arguments, & Voting Rights Decisions

James Santelle — Sat, 11 Mar 2023 17:00:00 +0000

Beginning the last in a three-arc series focusing special attention on the actions and impacts of our Supreme Court is a brief examination of some of its historical and recent demographics—including the first Justices to diversify representation in the areas of race, gender, religion, and even age. Followed by reporting on the (still unaccomplished) creation and enforcement of a practical, meaningful ethics code for the High Court, the profound need for which is illustrated in recent conflicts challenges for Associate Justice Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice John Roberts—along with the still-unresolved leak of the draft opinion in Dobbs.

A major review and assessment of four recent instances in which the Court has refused or may decline to review lower court rulings on important issues—including pending challenges to the end of Trump-era Title 42 protocols (prohibiting the entry into the country of asylum-seekers during the pandemic) and to the decision of the North Carolina Supreme Court rejecting racially-gerrymandered maps (and raising the specter of the adoption of the legally and practically bankrupt independent state legislature theory). Additionally including this week’s directive to Arizona courts to review the sentencings of more death row defendants (based on failures to advise jury members of non-capital incarceration options) and a major declination to revisit a lower court finding that plaintiffs have standing to seek remedies for alleged violations of the Establishment Clause, based on the community presentation of a post-shooting vigil by local officials featuring religious prayers and music by police chaplains.

Looking into the immediate future of the High Court, anticipated oral arguments this month on Native American Indian water rights, intellectual property claims to the manufacture of remote controls and toys mimicking the style of a famous whiskey bottle, and alleged false statements by two major grocery stores in connection with their Medicare and Medicaid prescription reportings. Finally, revisiting the two landmark decisions of the Justices in Heller (2008) and Bruen (2022) effectively eviscerating the decades-old mechanisms for remedying discriminatory practices in voting nationwide—along with the legislative “fixes” to both cases that have been and remain available to our country’s elected leaders.

[N.B.: Next week, the broadcast coming live from the Wisconsin Grass Roots Network in south-central Wisconsin, featuring specially an inventory of recent, Wisconsin-centric, justice-related, rule of law events of state-wide importance.]

All Things SCOTUS (Part Two): Court Traditions, Historic Decisions on the Second Amendment, and Arguments (Present) on Student Loan Forgiveness and (Future) the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

James Santelle — Sat, 04 Mar 2023 17:00:00 +0000

In this second of the three-arc series focusing special attention on the works and impacts of our Supreme Court—beginning with a brief historical review of some of the long-lasting traditions of it—the promised, extensive examination of two of the most important decisions in contemporary American history: Highlighting, first, the 2008 ruling (breaking with 200 years of precedent) that the Second Amendment to the Constitution establishes a right to possess and use weapons in the home for defensive purposes, and, second, the 2022 opinion extending that landmark ruling to our public venues and places of community congregation, vesting a right to carry weapons in those places without government authorization or legislative limitation. Even so, our discussion affirms the all-important language of both decisions affirming unequivocally that controls, restrictions, and other rational rules on the manufacture, sale, transfer, use, and other behaviors may be enacted and enforced in the paramount interests of safety and security; some of the most significant, experience-tested, constitutionally-permitted regulations to that beneficial end are also identified, explained, and enthusiastically encouraged.

Turning to the no-less-important developments at the High Court this past week, a note about two decisions issued—focusing on financial instruments under the Federal Disposition Act and compliance reports under the Bank Secrecy Act—and the procedural move by the Justices to review a major challenge to the legitimacy and operation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (albeit in the next, 2023-2024 term of its activity). Then, at the core of today’s broadcast, an assessment of the monumental oral arguments of this week before the Court—testing whether the President’s $400 billion student loan forgiveness initiative, announced and pursued under the Congressional authorization of the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students (“HEROES”) Act, is a proper exercise of executive authority or one reserved for the legislative branch. That review and evaluation of the Justices’ reactions to the program, much of it skeptical, concentrates on what the Court has described as the “major questions doctrine,” coupled with a possibly initiative-saving invocation of party “standing” principles.

Finally, the decision not to resolve a dispute about the continuation of the Trump-era doctrine prohibiting the entrance into the country of asylum-seekers during the pandemic and an equally under-reported dismissal of a challenge to restrictions on public lands in New Mexico—a huge, precedent-setting win for environmentalists.

[N.B.: Next week, the conclusion of this SCOTUS-focused series, including the Chief Justice’s wrestling with overtly problematic ethics problems for his Court.]

Revisiting the United States Supreme Court: Some Civics, Some Decisions, Some Arguments, and Some Lasting Legacies

James Santelle — Sat, 25 Feb 2023 17:00:00 +0000

[The First Segment in a Three-Part Arc Reporting on News of the High Court]

In a modest departure from the usual broadcast format, the initial presentation and analysis of the works and impacts of our Supreme Court—beginning with an exposition of its foundations in Article III of the Constitution and a review of its early history, including the seminal decisions establishing its authority to tell us all “what the law is.” Then, notice of three meaningful rulings announced this past week—in the areas of bankruptcy discharges, labor standards, and (with special emphasis) capital punishment and the obligations imposed on trial judges to tell juries about their options in making sentencing recommendations about life imprisonment without parole and state execution. (A decision in favor of the defendant in which, atypically, two conservative and three liberal justices agree.)

At the core of the discussion, a procedural ruling by the Justices to review and decide on the legitimacy of a criminal conviction of a Colorado man who posted on Face Book threats and other objectively offensive comments about a musician he was unmistakably stalking: The Supreme Court to decide whether the State is obliged to demonstrate by proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the actor actually intended to threaten—or whether the words themselves are sufficient to overcome the presumption of free speech otherwise guaranteed by the First Amendment. Tangentially related, particularized reporting from the two, major oral arguments conducted by the Justices this week—both cases focusing on whether internet and social media providers like Google, Twitter, You Tube, and Face Book are legally responsible for the admittedly catastrophic, lethal consequences of incendiary, indoctrinating posts of terrorist groups like the Islamic State (ISIL/ISIS). (Identifying the merits and demerits of holding public platforms liable under long-established anti-terrorism and communications laws passed by the Congress.)

Finally, the introduction to an in-depth analysis of two recent, geography-changing rulings by the Supreme Court, interpreting the Second Amendment to permit, first, the ownership and use of firearms for self-defense in personal residences, and, second, public (concealed and/or open) carry and discharge of weapons beyond the home. Premised upon the unmistakably horrific and unrelenting record of mass shootings in our nation, an examination of what the companion opinions in 2008 and 2022 do and do not say about what can be done to remedy this human crisis.

A Week of Major Legal News—Reconfirming that the 2020 Presidential Election Results are Fully Legitimate, Not Fraudulent

James Santelle — Sat, 18 Feb 2023 17:00:00 +0000

Beginning with an extensive review of some major, country-defining events on this day in American history (that continue to reverberate and impact our 21^st Century lives)—including the order by President Roosevelt to place in internment camps over 120,000 Americans of Japanese ancestry as the United States entered World War II against the Axis Powers. Then focusing on an equally extensive series of news items—all affirming, in ways direct and indirect, that the “Big Lie”—that is, that President Joseph Biden did not win the White House in 2020—is just that, a complete and demonstrable fabrication by former President Trump, his most strident (and deceptive) aides, other (equally manipulative) federal and state politicians, and at least one major news media outlet—all resulting in catastrophic damage to individuals, companies, government, and the very fabric of our nation.

Those series of reports include the stunning disclosure (in the context of a defamation lawsuit brought by the Dominion Voting Machines company) of irrefutable proof that the leadership and on-air “talent” of the so-called Fox News Network knew and appreciated fully that the last presidential election was not stolen but nonetheless continued to advance that illegitimate position in its broadcasts—for the purposes of maintaining viewership ratings and its financial status. Arguably the most significant stories of recent days, the recommendation by a special grand jury in Georgia that (unnamed) people be charged with election interference in that state, along with the “imminent” decision of the District Attorney there to charge those actors; the parallel pursuit by Justice Department Special Counsel Jack Smith of grand jury testimony of the former Vice President and former Chief of Staff in the federal investigation of the January 6 insurrection; the independent report of a Trump-hired research group, also finding no evidence of election fraud of any kind in any of the so-called “battleground states”; and (among the most curiously attractive news items) the apparent intention of the Proud Boys, now on trial in federal court for their seditious conspiracy to overthrow the election results, to call as a fact witness the former President himself—on the theory that it was Trump (and not them) who summoned the violent mob to the Capitol and is thus responsible for the melee that followed.

[N.B.: Reminding all program listeners of a very special series of Supreme Court-focused broadcasts—on Saturday, February 25, March 4, and March 11, updating the work of the High Court in anticipation of major decisions this coming Spring.]

Surveying Court Activities on Abortion Access, Classified Documents, the January 6 Insurrection, and Power Grid Attacks

James Santelle — Sat, 11 Feb 2023 17:00:00 +0000

Focusing on four major Rule of Law developments of this past week—beginning with the anticipated decision of a federal judge in Texas on whether a 22-year-old approval by the Food & Drug Administration of a well-tested and thoroughly reviewed abortion drug will stand, following the Supreme Court ruling last year eliminating a constitutional right to reproductive rights. Then an update on the continuing investigative and litigative work of the Justice Department in response to the assault on the Capitol—including the criminal sentencing of another defendant (among approximately 1000) for his active and violent role in the insurrection and the issuance to former Vice President Mike Pence of a subpoena to testify before a federal grand jury hearing evidence about the activities of high-level officials and aides in attempting to undermine the 2020 election results.

In the other component of the prosecutorial assignment to Special Counsel Jack Smith, analysis of the recent consent search by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the Indiana home of the former Vice President for additional classified or other improperly removed government documents—and the all-important revelation that some confidential information at the Mar-a-Lago residence of former President Trump had been electronically copied onto a laptop computer of an aide (the first confirmation of some use or transfer of materials beyond their mere storage).

In yet another illustration of the deterrent (both specific and general) effect of federal criminal prosecutions, the announcement of grand jury indictments against two defendants for their (unsuccessful) attempt to attack the infrastructure grid providing power to Baltimore and surrounding Maryland areas—as a means of intentionally destroying the safety, security, and well-being of millions of potentially affected residents and businesses. Today’s broadcast also highlighting the legacies of two American lives well-lived—namely, that of much-heralded composer, songwriter, and producer Burt Bacharach and of Wisconsin-based lawyer, Rule of Law promoter, public servant, and civil rights advocate Bill Hotz.

[N.B.: Also announcing a forthcoming special series of broadcasts—on February 25, March 4, and March 11, revisiting the contemporary trappings of the Supreme Court, highlighting major contemporary decisions that continue to affect American life in the 21^st Century, and examining recent ethics issues involving the Justices.]

More Lessons in Civics: Everything from Fourth Amendment Searches to Terrorist Detainees to Bankruptcy Court Abuses

James Santelle — Sat, 04 Feb 2023 17:00:00 +0000

Observing (among other, important Rule of Law events at this time in our history) the 20^th anniversary of unfounded and misleading representations by a former Secretary of State about Saddam Hussein’s purported possession of “weapons of mass destruction” –leading to the invasion of Iraq and, three years later, my own volunteer assignment as the Justice Attaché and a Rule of Law Coordinator there, working with and training a new generation of judges, police, and prison officials in the liberated but still monumentally challenged Republic. Back at home in contemporary America, in the wake of another FBI search of the vacation residence of the current President, an explanation of the differences between a cooperation-inspired consent search and a judicially-ordered search, premised on a finding of probable cause that evidence of a crime exists at a targeted location.

Among other current events inspiring examination of our justice system and the participants in it, reporting and analysis of a stunningly baseless decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, finding (contrary to a quarter century of law) that a domestic violence abuser may lawfully possess and use firearms under the Second Amendment; an international release from among more than 30 detainees still at the U.S. Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay of a formerly violent terrorist, who ultimately cooperated with government prosecutions of others but whose inhumane and illegal treatment at the hands of CIA and related jailers warrants continuing condemnation; and the forward progress of a federal wrongful death action by the father of one of the two men killed by Kyle Rittenhouse in the community protests of August 2020 in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

Concluding with a (highly appropriate) ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, finding that well-funded Johnson & Johnson cannot use the jurisdiction of the United States Bankruptcy Courts to protect and shield it from civil claims of people alleging physical harm from their use of talc products from the medicinal producer-distributor; the shocking reporting of the indictment and arrest of a former counterintelligence supervisor-official of the FBI for working with and being paid by a Russian oligarch that the federal domestic agency was investigating for serious crimes against the United States; and the move by the Manhattan District Attorney to pursue the criminal investigation of pre-presidential candidate Donald Trump for violations of New York state law in his payment of “hush monies” to women with whom he secretly had affairs.

America Shaken by Another Citizen Death at the Hands of Violent Police—And Four Important Updates in Connection with 1/6

James Santelle — Sat, 28 Jan 2023 17:00:00 +0000

Devoting a full hour to exposition, analysis, understanding, and reaction to the tragic and horrifying murder of Tyre Nichols by five Memphis Police Officers in early January—including a graphic review of four videotapes of the stops, apprehensions, assaults, and beatings that led to the appropriate firings and state charges. Embedded in that examination, a prediction of Justice Department involvement in both a criminal civil rights prosecution and a “pattern and practice”-type review of systemic policing failures. Finally, in answer to the legitimate question “What can I do?”—a two-fold recommendation: Support of and demand for congressional passage of the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act (stalled in the 117^th Congress and to be re-introduced in the 118^th) and universal and practical training of all newly-recruited and tenured law enforcement in the constitutional trappings of use of force, arrest procedure, and community engagement issues relevant to effective, service-based policing in the 21^st Century.

Another week of diverse but important developments in our continuing attempts to make sense of, learn lessons from, and remedy the criminal and conspiratorial behaviors that prompted the insurrection and attack on the Capitol on January 6, including: The most recent convictions of Oath Keeper defendants for seditious conspiracy—following the previous convictions of other leaders of this white nationalist anti-government group and in the midst of the continuing trial of other leaders of the Proud Boys, similarly charged in the federal district court in Washington, D.C.; the 80-month sentencing of the attacker who brutally assaulted Brian Sicknick one day before his untimely death; the impending trial of former White House Trade Advisor Peter Navarro on two counts of contempt of Congress; and—perhaps most important—the “impending” decisions of the Atlanta-based District Attorney about charging ex-President Donald Trump and his aides for attempting to subvert and undermine the 2020 election results in Georgia.

Finally, during this term at the United States Supreme Court—the first major decision dismissing a claim for disability benefits made by a veteran whose petition was untimely—along with a stunning (ethics-invoking) revelation about former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who placed his imprimatur on the failed investigation into the premature leak of the Dobbs abortion decision, even as he was receiving $1 million from the Court for providing security recommendations and other contracted services for the Justices and their families.

Remembering Roe on the Eve of Its Decision Anniversary, Other Significant Court Events, & Violent Crime Prosecutions

James Santelle — Sat, 21 Jan 2023 17:00:00 +0000

Beginning the discussion with a review of our constitutional right to privacy, as first articulated clearly in 1965 and reaffirmed broadly until 2021, when the Supreme Court of the United States not only rescinded nearly 50 years of access to abortion but also placed in jeopardy many other fundamental privileges and prerogatives in the areas of personal relationships and private decision-making. And among the over 50 important cases now awaiting rulings from the High Court, two set for oral argument next month—both focusing on the liability of social media service providers for the false, misleading, incendiary, and indoctrinating posts of its users; all of this as the SCOTUS Marshal announces the curiously stunning results of her failed attempt to identify the court official who released the non-public draft of the landmark decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health.

Among the body of other legal-government news of this past week, the continuing civil defamation prosecution of Dominion v. FOX News, based on the latter’s knowingly false reporting on the involvement of the former in the election of 2020; another interesting evidentiary ruling in the federal criminal prosecution of the Proud Boys for their direction of and seditious conspiracy in the January 6 attack on the Capitol; and the latest scathing rebuke of Donald Trump by a federal judge imposing a $1 million fine on him and his attorney for starting an overtly frivolous and factually unfounded case against his political rivals and adversaries.

In the arena of violent crimes, a review of the arrest of an unsuccessful Republican candidate for New Mexico state office charged with violent firearms attacks at and on the homes of elected Democratic leaders; the decision by the Attorney General of the United States not to seek the death penalty in the hate crimes murders of 23 people committed by the gunman at the El Paso Walmart in August of 2019; and accounts from the Georgia criminal trial of rapper Young Thug for RICO and other wildly violent crimes—now likely exacerbated by the distribution of Percocet in the courtroom itself and the atypical penalty imposed by the presiding judge on a prospective juror who chose not to return to the courtroom, acting in contempt of the proceedings and compromising the foundations of our Rule of Law system.

Assessing the ‘Classified Documents’ Investigations of a Current and a Former President—And Other Trump Stories

James Santelle — Sat, 14 Jan 2023 17:00:00 +0000

With the headlines-grabbing news this week of the discovery of classified documents in the former office and current home of the President, a legal analysis of what we know and what we don’t, including the critical investigative questions in this (and any other “intent-focused”) inquiry—all affirming the fundamental notion that no one is above the law. That review leads necessarily to an early evaluation of the significant factual and legal differences between the Biden file and the Trump matter, focusing on the former President’s taking and retention at Mar-a-Lago of thousands of documents, about 100 of them classified in nature. Adding to Donald Trump’s broad circle of litigation and other legal challenges, a summary of his recent deposition testimony in the defamation lawsuit brought against him by E. Jean Carroll; the revelation that former senior advisor Rudy Giuliani has been subpoenaed by a federal grand jury, perhaps in connection with its investigation of the Trump-founded “Save America Pac”; the status of and important developments in the criminal trial of the Proud Boys for their involvement in the January 6 insurrection; and the parallels to the investigation of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro for his possible criminal incitement of the recent mob attack on legislative and other government offices in Brasilia.

Returning to the all-important landscape-changing activities of the United States Supreme Court, at least three notable events this past week—namely, the (interim/non-final) decision of the Justices not to overturn the decision of a lower appeals court, upholding a newly-enacted New York law imposing restrictions on the open/public carry use of firearms; the refusal of the High Court to overturn the dismissal of an action by a private citizen against Members of Congress, alleging that they stole his vote by identifying President Biden as the winner of the 2020 election; and the identification by SCOTUS of eight additional cases for its review in this judicial term. Among those, yet another case testing the scope and breadth of religious rights (under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the First Amendment) when matched against the legitimate operational requirements of government business—this one, involving a former postal worker who sought a special accommodation to be released from work on the Sabbath (Sundays).

Making Legal Sense of the News from the White House to Capitol Hill to Main Justice—and from Washington to Idaho to Massachusetts

James Santelle — Sat, 07 Jan 2023 17:00:00 +0000

In the immediate aftermath of the selection of a Speaker of the House of Representatives in the new 118^th Congress, a reflection on why the diverse responsibilities and professional operation of government, including the leadership of it, is critically important to the Constitutional legitimacy and vitality of our nation. And, two years after the attempted insurrection and violent riot at the United States Congress, a summary of those law enforcement officers, government officials, and other “extraordinary” Americans who not only defended the Republic on January 6, 2021, but also acted boldly and courageously to ensure that the voices and forces of anarchy do not overtake and supplant our democratic institutions—as recognized by the President at the White House.

In much related legal reporting on the assault, the federal criminal sentencing of another major defendant for his violent acts at the Capitol; the start of a another civil lawsuit against the former President (and two others) for causing the death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick; the selection of a jury in the criminal trial of the leader of and lieutenants in the Proud Boys for their violent seditious conspiracy; and the anticipated start of the Congressional contempt trial of Peter Navarro for failing to comply with the subpoena of the House Select Committee.

In other important judicial proceedings of the week, a review and interpretation of the law enforcement affidavit outlining some aspects of the state criminal case against Bryan Kohberger, charged with the brutal murders of four University of Idaho students; the charging of two defendants for their physical assaults on critical power stations in Tacoma, Washington on Christmas Day; and the sentencing of William “Rick” Singer in Boston for his role in the so-called “Varsity Blues” scandal, through which parents paid him to secure the fraudulent entrance of their college age children into prestigious universities. And finally, in anticipation of more discussion of major decisions forthcoming from the United States Supreme Court in mid-2023, a brief review of the oral argument calendar of the Justices in the coming work week of the federal judiciary.

Feverish Legal News in the Final Days of the Year: Investigations, Charges, Sentencings, Pardons, and More

James Santelle — Sat, 31 Dec 2022 17:00:00 +0000

Reflecting on many of the recent, significant stories in law, government, and justice, a whirlwind survey of five of the most important developments of late 2022—including the decision by the Supreme Court to continue the Trump era, pandemic-based regulation prohibiting asylum seekers from coming into America; the severe sentencings of two of the many defendants who conspired to kidnap and harm the Governor of Michigan; the arrest in Pennsylvania of the alleged murderer of four University of Idaho undergraduates; the issuance by the President of six constitutional pardons to deserving citizens; and the release by the House Ways and Means Committee of six years of the personal tax returns of ex-President Trump (along with some initial assessments of what those documents reveal).

In the immediate aftermath of the final work of the House Selection Committee on the January 6 Attack on the Capitol, a review of some of its broad and many of its specific factual findings and assessments—including primary focus on the responsibility of Donald Trump before, during, and after the assault. In more detail, a modest legal analysis of the recommendations of the Committee for his criminal prosecution under four, discrete but related theories—namely, obstruction of official proceedings, conspiracy to defraud the United States, making false statements to the Government, and inciting, assisting and otherwise encouraging insurrection. And an exposition of the principal architects of the so-called “fake electors”/illegal “senate president strategy”; recommendations to bar the ex-President from any future official service under the 14^th Amendment to the Constitution and to bar some Trump lawyers from the practice of law for their frivolous litigation; evidence of the ex-President’s profound dereliction of duty in failing to respond timely and effectively to the attack; a description of his co-conspirators both within and outside of his senior circle of “lieutenants”; the enacted amendments to the Electoral Count Act to prevent future efforts to undermine Congressional counting; and the fascinating reports of a “blue team” on the failures of law enforcement to digest and respond to pre-insurrection threats of violence and of a “green team” that documented some $250 million raised by the Trump Campaign and the Republican National Committee—all based on the thoroughly fraudulent but widely promoted “big lie” about the 2020 election.

Some final “take-aways” from the Committee reporting—along with predictions about next actions by the Justice Department prosecutors—in the next broadcast!

In the Midst of Two Historic Weeks: The January 6 Committee Reporting & The Collapse of the FTX Currency Exchange

James Santelle — Sat, 17 Dec 2022 17:00:00 +0000

Looking backward and forward to two major events of recent days—First, the anticipated findings of the House Committee on the January 6 Insurrection (including legislative recommendations and criminal referrals), coupled with the latest, high-profile sentencing of a Capitol Building rioter, a Congressional move under the Fourteenth Amendment to prevent former President Trump from holding federal office, the disbarring of a Trump attorney for litigation abuses, and the grand jury focus on an incumbent congressman for his role in promoting attempts to invalidate the legitimate results of the 2020 Presidential election. Second, the revelation of federal charges against Sam Bankman-Fried for defrauding investors and committing campaign finance violations in the conduct of his cryptocurrency business, along with the Congressional testimony of the business manager now assigned to manage what may be the largest financial disaster of recent times.

In other venues of criminal prosecution, the state court sentencings of three additional defendants previously convicted of a conspiracy to kidnap the Michigan governor—to 12-, 10-, and 7-year terms of imprisonment. In Illinois, the decision by the state prosecutor to charge the father of the gunman who killed seven people in Highland Park with knowingly and recklessly supporting his son’s gun application permit. Back in New York, the revelation that the Trump Organization was secretly held in contempt of court for failing to turn over evidence during the criminal investigation of the state tax fraud case, recently resulting in a felony conviction of two family companies. And the scheduling for November of 2023 by the same judge who presided over that Trump matter of the criminal trial of Steve Bannon for defrauding investors in a scheme to build a southern border wall. Finally, the setting of an unrelated state trial against the Trump Corporation for promoting a multi-level marketing scheme—in January of 2024, as the main year of the next Presidential campaign begins, including Donald Trump as a candidate.

“Morning Cannolis” will be on hiatus on Saturday, December 24, but will return with a sweeping “year in review” broadcast on Saturday, December 31—focusing on the major stories of 2022 in the areas of government, justice, courts, and the Rule of Law in America.

The Darkness on the Edge of Town: A Week Full of Reasons for Concern and Grounds for Optimism about America

James Santelle — Sat, 10 Dec 2022 17:00:00 +0000

Beginning with both the warning and the hope of journalist Brian Williams about the future of the United States, an in-depth presentation on and analysis of the two, landmark oral arguments before the United States Supreme Court this week—the first on whether the discredited but still dangerous “independent state legislature theory” should be adopted and applied (in whole or in part), and the second on whether a provider of commercial services, invoking free speech and religious liberty rights, has the lawful authority to disregard a state law prohibiting discrimination based on, among other immutable characteristics, sexual orientation. [A series of terrifically insightful calls from broadcast listeners animated much of this discussion, including practical and rhetorical questions about the cataclysmic consequences if the High Court “gets these cases wrong.”]

Then, updates on three, highly important legal events of recent days—including the status of the request by the Justice Department to hold the office of former President Trump in contempt for failure to produce all of the classified and other records illegally taken by him to the Mar-a-Lago venue and other locations in early 2021; the meaning and likely import of the criminal (felony) conviction of the Trump Organization for tax fraud and other financial crimes in a New York state court; and the announcements by the House Select Committee on the January 6 insurrection of its intention to make “criminal referrals” to the Justice Department and, no less important, to release its long-anticipated official report on its factual findings and legislative proposals—expected on Friday, December 16. [The “Morning Cannolis” broadcast the following day, Saturday, December 17, will be devoted almost exclusively to a description and analysis of that official release.]

Finally, in the wake of the positive action of the United States Congress in passing the landmark Respect for Marriage Act, a brief look back at two other, major legislative accomplishments of 2022—namely, the enactment (after a century of trying) of the Emmett Till Act, making lynching a federal crime, along with the renewal (after years of inactivity) of the omnibus Violence Against Women Act, funding and otherwise supporting a variety of victim-supporting initiatives and programs, including those recognizing the sovereignty of our Native American Indian governments in enforcing Trial laws and victim rights.

In Observance of Six Months of Broadcasts—The Language of Judges, Witnesses, & Lawyers in Our Courts

James Santelle — Sat, 03 Dec 2022 17:00:00 +0000

Consistent with the adopted mission of the program to offer analysis and discussion of the major stories in law, government, and the aspiration for justice in America, we begin this week with an extended review of the content—and the equally-important language—of the landmark ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, finally bringing to an end the from-the-start frivolous and unfounded civil challenge by former President Trump to the legitimate, fact-based, judicially-sanctioned investigation of the Mar-a-Lago documents crimes. To that same end, we also engage in some in-depth exposition of the guilty verdicts in the seditious conspiracy against the Oath Keepers insurrectionists—and examine the trials of their co-defendants and of the parallel leadership of the Proud Boys anti-government group scheduled to begin in the weeks and months just ahead. Complementing all of that is our assessment of the closing arguments in the state criminal trial in which the Trump Organization is charged with various tax fraud violations; the highly notable testimonial appearances before a federal grand jury investigating the January 6 riot of the former White House counsel and his deputy; the appellate arguments in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on whether the former President should be held personally liable for his defamatory statements made in response to allegations of his sexual assault in the mid-1990s; and the announcement of plans by the United States Supreme Court to review the legitimacy of President Biden’s student loan forgiveness initiative (affecting tens of millions of Americans), recently suspended by rulings of lower federal courts finding it unconstitutional.

And, finally, we emphasize the significance of the two, major arguments before that same High Court in the coming business week—one testing the limits of First Amendment free speech (and religious exercise) doctrines in connection with the concomitant rights of the LGBTQIA community to be free from discrimination in contracting, and the other determining if, in the wake of two centuries of judicial involvement in resolving election-related challenges, the courts still have a role to play in deciding the processes and protocols of our federal elections—including disputes about the state electors designated to identify the future Presidents.

An Exceedingly Busy Week in Our Nation’s Courts—Including Lots of Unfavorable Rulings for the former President

James Santelle — Sat, 26 Nov 2022 17:00:00 +0000

In ways obvious and discrete, explicit and implicit, the federal and state courts of America this week rejected two of the principal doctrines that have animated the litigation actions of Donald Trump—namely, that he is entitled to special treatment as a former President, including serial delays in the otherwise routine delivery of justice: From the unanimous ruling of the Supreme Court that the House Ways & Means Committee is legally entitled to examine the tax returns of the former President to the unfavorable reaction of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals to his attack on the investigation of the Mar-a-Lago documents matter, the highest courts in the land dealt serious blows to his legal status. Those were accompanied (all in this same week) by the near-conclusion of the criminal tax fraud trial in New York State of two principal Trump companies, the setting of a trial date in the somewhat-related civil properties valuation litigation prosecuted by the State Attorney General, the filing of a new lawsuit alleging sexual assault and battery by Mr. Trump in a Manhattan department store over 20 years ago, and the assumption of investigative (and perhaps prosecutorial) oversight of the Justice Department’s documents and January 6 insurrection work by the newly-designated Special Counsel. In that connection, as the jury deliberates on a verdict in the federal seditious conspiracy trial against the Proud Boys, the House Select Committee is preparing for the release its final report, memorializing factual findings and legislative recommendations based on its examination of the attack on the Capitol. In the realm of education-related civil litigation, a petition to the Supreme Court to overrule the decisions of lower federal courts invalidating President Biden’s student loan debt forgiveness initiative—and a $ 6 billion settlement in an action by students charging that they were defrauded by their colleges. And, finally, a decision by the State Department that the Saudi Crown Prince receive immunity in an American court for his alleged role in the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

An exceedingly busy time in our nation’s justice system, including a series of high-profile oral arguments in late November and early December on major cases pending before the Supreme Court, including one on immigration policy.

Appointments of ‘Special’ Participants in the Judicial Process—A ‘Monitor’ & A ‘Counsel’—And A Significant Case Before the Supreme Court on the Liability of On-Line Social Media Platforms

James Santelle — Sat, 19 Nov 2022 17:00:00 +0000

On a day when America recalls the stirring words of Abraham Lincoln in dedication of the National Cemetery at the Gettysburg Battlefield 159 years ago, describing and discussing the contemporary applications of his Rule of Law-inspiring message: First, witnessed in two major appointments of this past week—namely, the selection of former federal trial Judge Barbara Jones to monitor the actions of the Trump Companies while the State of New York continues its civil litigation, and the announcement of former federal prosecutor Jack Smith to oversee and direct the continuing federal investigations of the former President’s involvement in the January 6 insurrection and his (unrelated) taking and retention of records (some classified) following his departure from office in January of 2021.

Unqualified endorsement of the former appointment to ensure that no further state violations occur in the management of properties and other financial assets—and strong support for the further pursuit of federal charges in the latter, but with considerable concern about the messaging (implicit if not explicit in the special counsel appointment) about the enduring, now restored capacities of ethical, tenured civil servants of the Justice Department to conduct this important work—absent credible concerns about their political impartiality and non-partisan ethics.

Excellent commentary and questioning from broadcast callers leading naturally into the review of the major goings-on in two (also unrelated) criminal trials of this past week—namely, the testimony of federal defendants in the seditious conspiracy trial (in Washington, D.C.) of Oath Keepers charged with organizing the January 6 rioting, and the testimony of the chief financial officer (a cooperating state defendant) of the Trump Organization in the criminal tax fraud trial in Manhattan. Finally, complementing our weeks-long analysis of some of the most important cases pending before the United States Supreme Court, an outline of a judicial challenge to the lawfulness of a long-standing federal law shielding on-line social media platform-providers for false, damaging, and incendiary posts of their users.

The Feverish Pace of Judicial Activity Continues in the Civil and Criminal Courts, Trial and Appellate, of America

James Santelle — Sat, 12 Nov 2022 17:00:00 +0000

For the second week in a row, a survey and analysis of some of the breathtaking goings-on in our nation’s tribunals—including the freezing of Alex Jones’ financial assets to prevent their looting, the stunning testimony of Stewart Rhodes in his continuing trial for seditious conspiracy, and the appointment of an impartial monitor to ensure that the assets of the Trump companies are not dissipated while financial fraud litigation against it continues. In other judicial arenas, a new federal lawsuit by the former President in an attempt to stop his subpoenaed testimonial appearance before the January 6 House Committee; the imposition of sanctions against the attorneys who initiated another of his federal actions frivolously seeking damages against people who allegedly compromised his reputation; a supplemental New York lawsuit anticipated from E. Jean Carroll against Donald Trump under the New York Adult Survivors Act; and decisions by federal district judges in Texas finding unconstitutional President Biden’s student loan forgiveness program and invalidating the prohibition on anti-LGBTQ discrimination (based on sexual orientation and gender identify) as established by the Affordable Care Act. And in the highest court of the land, three oral arguments this past week on Supreme Court cases that may reshape the agency operations of the Federal Trade Commission and the Securities & Exchange Commission, rescind decades of Medicaid/Medicare policy permitting lawsuits for abusive health care practices, and eliminate the key provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act, directing the foster care and adoption placements of Native American youth in homes that promote the preservation of their cultural heritage and ethnic legacies.

In Celebration of Voting: A Call to the Polls & A Frenetic Week of Court Activity in America

James Santelle — Sat, 05 Nov 2022 16:00:00 +0000

At the start, judges both federal and state presiding over criminal and civil proceedings from coast to coast in the United States—including the seditious conspiracy trial of the Oath Keepers in Washington, D.C., the criminal fraud prosecution of the Trump companies in New York City, the punitive damages proceeding against Alex Jones in Connecticut, the state sentencing of the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School shooter in South Florida, and the oral arguments before the Justices of the Supreme Court on whether colleges and universities may use race as a factor in admitting new student classes. Then, in anticipation of the mid-term elections in the coming week, a review of the ways in which the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) historically prohibited discrimination in polling practices—until the High Court eliminated the clearance process that prevented historically-offending jurisdictions from enacting and enforcing dis-enfranchising rules and diminished the key provisions of the civil rights law previously meant to ensure voting access for people of color; much related, the possibility that the Supreme Court may strike another blow at the VRA in June—and the attempts, unsuccessful in Congress to date, to restore and reinvigorate the statute to promote voting opportunities for all Americans in the years ahead. Finally, an interactive discussion with the executive director of a local civics-advancing organization—focusing on the practical trappings of what to expect at polling places, including the mechanisms for same-day, on-site registration and the prescribed roles and conduct limitations of election observers, among others with official responsibilities to make voting reliably accessible and integrity-based.

The Latest, Important Decision-Making of our Federal & State Courts on Issues Affecting our Nation—Part 2

James Santelle — Sat, 29 Oct 2022 16:00:00 +0000

After another week of breathtaking events and landmark decisions inside and outside our nation’s courts right prompts the question: “What are we to make of these seemingly related news stories that also change who we are and what we will be in America?” Among the blizzard of topics for analysis—stunning decisions by a single federal appeals court invalidating the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; the belated ruling of another federal circuit tribunal directing the release of former President Donald Trump’s tax returns to the House Ways & Means Committee; the start of the criminal trial against the Trump Corporation for tax and related fraud in a Manhattan courtroom; the sentencing by a federal trial judge in Washington, D.C. of one of the most brutally vicious rioters-insurrectionists of January 6; the conviction in a federal court in Michigan of more anti-government conspirators involved in a foiled plot to kidnap and murder that state’s incumbent governor; and the ruling by a South Carolina state court directing that Mark Meadows, the former White House Chief of Staff, appear for testimony before a Georgia grand jury investigating the attempt to undermine voting and change the actual results of the 2020 presidential polling there. And near the end of the first month of public arguments before the United States Supreme Court in its 2022-2023 term, an analysis of three more (among ten, previously-highlighted) important cases pending before it (likely to be decided in June)—focusing on the immigration enforcement authority of the Homeland Security Secretary to prioritize investigations and deportations of the most public safety-threatening illegal aliens, another challenging the right of nursing home patients to sue for civil rights violations in their health care treatment, and a third re-igniting the clash between religious and speech liberties under the First Amendment and the rights of LGBTQ community members to engage in commercial service contracts.

The Latest, Important, and Much-Related Decision-Making of our Federal Courts on Issues Affecting our Nation

James Santelle — Sat, 22 Oct 2022 16:00:00 +0000

In the whirlwind days of this past business week, our federal courts at all levels have continued to issue decisions affecting who we are and what we will be as Americans:

Among the many judicial rulings that have rightly attracted headlines are the rejection by the United States Supreme Court of an emergency application to review the planned start of the President’s student loan forgiveness program—and, in that same connection, an injunction issued by the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals (overturning a trial judge in St. Louis) to stop the administration of that landmark initiative.

In other areas, federal trial courts in Washington, D.C. imposed criminal sentences of imprisonment on former Presidential advisor Steve Bannon for contempt of Congress and on one (among many others) of the youngest January 6 insurrection-rioters; much-related, another federal judge in California released yet another set of emails between former Presidential lawyer John Eastman and former President Trump—finding that they revealed crime-inspired attempts to defraud the American public about the results of the 2020 election.

Back in the nation’s capital, a trial jury found a third defendant prosecuted by Special Counsel (and former United States Attorney) John Durham not guilty of lying to the FBI—effectively bringing to an end a 3-1/2 year “investigation of the investigation” of the connections between the Trump Campaign and Russia in the 2016 Presidential election.

In New York, both a trial judge and an appellate court were wrestling with the civil defamation claims brought by a journalist against the former President for statements he made about her truthfulness reporting on an alleged sexual assault in the mid-1990s—about which Donald Trump was deposed this past week.

And in the context of the continuing focus on documents seized at the Mar-a-Lago resort, the Special Master this week expressed skepticism (“Where’s the beef?,” he said) about the arguments made by lawyers for the former President in attempt to stop the Justice Department investigation into the sources, possession, and uses of official government documents—some of which (related to pardons and immigration policy) the President curiously described as his “personal possessions.” A tumultuous week in the pursuit of justice—dissected and explained in this episode.

In reply to the always-engaging questions and comments from listeners, some important clarifications about what Roe v. Wade did and did not establish about abortion and privacy rights, the status of various federal and state investigations into the criminal behavior of the “false electors” from Wisconsin and six other states, the effect of the upcoming Congressional elections on the capacity of the Justice Department to litigate on behalf of our citizenry, and the inter-relatedness of all of this on the future of our Republic.

The Importance of Public Accountability, Behavioral Deterrence, and Precision in Public Language

James Santelle — Sat, 15 Oct 2022 16:00:00 +0000

Focusing on three of the most significant news developments in the areas of law,
government, and the aspiration for justice in America, what special insights and
practical perspectives should we glean from: first, the gradual but unmistakable
movement of the federal appellate courts toward rebuking former President Trump
in his challenges to the criminal investigation of the Mar-a-Lago documents
matter; second, the latest colossal monetary judgment of a fact-finding jury against
Alex Jones for the profound, conspiracy-mongering injuries he caused to the
families of the victims of the Sandy Hook school shooting; and third, the final
hearing of the House Select Committee on the January 6 insurrection—including
disturbing reporting about the failures of the former Chief Executive to act
decisively and timely to stop the riot, even as his own fabulist tales about the
illegitimacy of the most secure and reliable election in our nation’s history lit the
fires of sedition and promoted his self-interested goal of sowing mistrust and
division among Americans? Equally important to our Republic, what hugely
important issues in the areas of interstate commerce, intellectual property rights,
affirmative action, and Native American Indian engagements are before our United
States Supreme Court—for present argument this Fall and landmark decision-
making next Spring?

The discussion of the SCOTUS docket, a regular component
of every Saturday morning broadcast, continues this week and in future weeks.

The Most Recent Presidential Pardons & the Most Important Oral Arguments before the Supreme Court

James Santelle — Sat, 08 Oct 2022 14:00:00 +0000

Invoking his delegated authority under Section 2 of the Constitution, the President
this past week twice granted pardons and clemency to groups of people—for very
different reasons, under very different circumstances. How should we understand
these decisions to commute the sentences of convicted felons to secure the return
of Americans imprisoned in a foreign country and, unrelated, to pardon thousands
of people with prior federal convictions for marijuana possession? Returning to
Section 3 of the Constitution, what might we have learned this past week from the
public, oral arguments before the Supreme Court on a major environmental case
under the Clean Water Act and on a challenge to a racially-gerrymandered
congressional map under the Voting Rights Act? And to which cases—including
one on the interstate commerce clause involving the sale of pork and another on
federal copyright law involving the legacies of Andy Warhol and Prince—should
we be attentive as our High Court continues to define our lives and livelihoods in
the United States of America of this early 21 st Century?

The Uses & Abuses of the Power to Pardon—And the Major Cases on the Docket of the Supreme Court

James Santelle — Sat, 01 Oct 2022 14:00:00 +0000

In times when a former President raises the specter of pardoning all of the
defendants convicted of crimes for their involvement in the January 6 riot and
insurrection—and when one of that former President’s senior advisors seeks a
second pardon for his criminal culpability in the attempt to overthrow the operation
of government—it is fitting to explore the constitutional sources of the pardon
power, including its proper and “grace”-based invocations, along with the abuses
to justice accomplished when it is extended to family, friends, and political allies.
From Article II to Article III of the Constitution, the imminent beginning of the
new term of the Supreme Court prompts review and understanding of some of the
significant court controversies in the areas of voting-elections and the environment
in 2022-2023. How should we understand the delegated roles and established
missions of our executive and judicial branches in contemporary America as they
continue to affect so profoundly who we are and what we may become?

As indicated, today’s broadcast is also the first of three to examine some of the
nearly 30 cases that will be argued before and decided by the nine Justices of the
High Court, beginning on the first Monday in October and continuing well into
mid-2023; “take-aways” from those arguments and likely outcomes on the
questions presented will be featured regularly during the next nine months.

The Appeals Court & Special Master Affirm the Rule of Law and an Attorney General Takes On Financial Corruption

James Santelle — Sat, 24 Sep 2022 14:00:00 +0000

On a day when our nation remembers and commemorates the 65th anniversary of
the presidentially-directed and militarily-accomplished racial integration of the
Little Rock High School in segregationist Arkansas, contemporary news about the
promotion of and victory for the Rule of Law in America also rightly attracts
attention: Based on an in-depth review and careful analysis of this week’s
landmark decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11 th Circuit, what should we
understand about the unfettered conduct of legitimate criminal investigations, the
significance of government evaluations of national security compromises, the
appropriately-described limits of authority of former presidents, and the justice-
focused responsibility of thoughtful and informed judges to invoke and apply the
law without political agendas or partisan goals? Beyond the implications of the
Justice Department’s next steps in addressing the illegal possession of classified
and non-classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, what is the court-appointed Special
Master doing to ensure that the former president’s lawyers live up to their oaths by
making only fact-based, provable representations about their publicly reckless,
uneducated client and his likely criminal behavior? And what are the significant,
short- and long-term implications of the sweeping civil suit brought by New
York’s Attorney General to do everything short of shutting down completely the
fraudulently-run, financially-victimizing business that is the Trump organization?

Today’s broadcast also introduced two new topics that will be undertaken and
pursued with greater focus in the weeks ahead—namely, the uses and abuses of the
president’s pardon powers by previous administrations and the important cases
about to be heard by the Supreme Court beginning the first Monday in October.

The Traditional, Rule of Law-Inspired Role of Judges & Prosecutors

James Santelle — Sat, 17 Sep 2022 14:00:00 +0000

The search and seizure in early August of some 11,000 documents, including 100
classified items, at the residence-resort of former President Donald Trump
continues to generate investigative activity and, most recently, highly intrusive
judicial action. Among the most recent developments have been the decisions of a
federal judge in South Florida to stop the review and assessment of the criminal
implications of the transfer, possession, and possible use of these materials—and
the appointment of a former federal judge as a special master to make rulings on
the attorney-client and executive privilege characteristics of them. What should we
understand about the strategic decision by the Justice Department to appeal the key
portion of the judge’s injunction, effectively preventing an evaluation of the
damage suffered to our national security, and where does all of this go next?
Similarly implicating foundational rule of law issues were disclosures this past
week of serious, repeated attempts by the Trump White House to influence and
even direct the investigation and prosecution decisions of the Justice Department in
several high profile files in recent years—and the likely conclusion soon of the
investigation of the legitimacy of the so-called Mueller inquiry into Russian
interference with the 2016 election and obstruction of justice during it by the
former President. Why are these key revelations important to evaluating the
recent, highly troubling legal history of our nation, and what lessons for the future
do they teach when our elected and appointed officials inject political interests and
partisan goals into what should be the otherwise independent actions of
investigators and prosecutors charged with acting independently and impartially?

The Assigned Missions and Recent Actions of Federal & State Courts in America

James Santelle — Sat, 10 Sep 2022 14:00:29 +0000

Like virtually every week in the recent history of our nation, the past seven days have been replete with a significant number of important, life- and community-altering decisions by elected and appointed judges. Among those “in the headlines” are directives for the appointment of a special master to review the many documents seized at the office/residence of a former president and for the disqualification under the Fourteenth Amendment of a publicly-elected official to serve, based upon his participation in the insurrection of January 6, 2021. Somewhat less well-publicized were the imposition of a huge civil monetary penalty against a major midwestern university for libeling a small commercial bakery adjacent to its campus, the omnibus disposition of the legitimate restitution claims of the victim-survivors and families of the condominium collapse in South Florida some 15 months ago, the Wisconsin-based charging of a defendant who fraudulently assumed the identities of state elected officials in an illegal effort to “prove” voter fraud, and the unconditional dismissal by a federal trial judge of a meritless civil action brought by the former chief executive against other government and political leaders alleging (without foundation) their purposeful intent to damage his reputation. What do these and some ten other court cases of recent days tell us about the diverse and often unpredictable work of our judiciary in addressing and resolving a broad variety of criminal and civil litigation claims?

The History and Judicial Understanding of Labor in America

James Santelle — Sat, 03 Sep 2022 14:00:11 +0000

The genesis, development, and establishment of a Labor Day observance in American in the late 19th Century tells us a lot about the important, historic role of the labor movement, its leadership, and, most important, the workers who animated it. Two recent decisions of the United States Supreme Court involving the dues-based, representative power of labor unions and the rights of employees to be free from discrimination similarly reflect who we are as a nation—as do the accounts of a former local Waukesha alderman in his personal history and public service. [The host of WAUK’s “This Week in Waukesha” joins the conversation as a special on-air guest.] What is important to value and appreciate about the ways in which the so-called “working class” in our nation has been responsible for defining our rights and prerogatives in employment, even amidst past and continuing challenges?

Guests: Don Browne

Two Historic Legal Documents in Recent American History

James Santelle — Sat, 27 Aug 2022 14:00:44 +0000

This past week, the United States Justice Department (upon judicial order) released the internal memorandum of March 2019, upon which Attorney General William Barr chose (falsely) to say that the Investigative Report of Special Counsel Robert Mueller did not describe any obstruction of justice by Former President Trump; it also disclosed the sworn (albeit heaving redacted) affidavit establishing the probable cause for a federal magistrate to conclude that evidence of crimes existed at Trump’s residence/office at Mar-a-Lago, justifying the law enforcement search there. What do these two (related) documents tell us about the past and current criminal behavior of the former Chief Executive in impeding the investigation of Russian interference in the 2020 Election and of his Attorney General is misdescribing the investigative findings about those. And how may we interpret what is now public about the overt disregard of laws and regulations governing the possession, retention, transfer, and use of highly classified government documents and other presidential records by a former chief executive and his staff?

The Rule of Law Mandates for Search Warrants—And What Follows

James Santelle — Sat, 20 Aug 2022 14:00:28 +0000

For the first time in the history of the United States, the residence-office of a former President was the target this week of a judicially-authorized warrant for its search and the seizure of documents. The release of the actual court order for that law enforcement action, along with the specific locations to be searched and the particular items to be seized, has provided some insight into the nature and the focus of the work of the United States Department of Justice, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation—even as much about the apparent removal, transport, and retention of classified and other presidential materials remains unknown. What does the Fourth Amendment and federal law generally prescribe about the means and mechanisms for establishing “probable cause” to search, how do judges, prosecutors, and police play roles in that process, and what follows—including inventorying and examining the materials obtained and possible indictments by a federal grand jury presented with evidence of the relevant, material findings?

More Significant Justice News of the Week—And Reflections on the Anniversary of the Sikh Temple Violence

James Santelle — Sat, 06 Aug 2022 14:00:39 +0000

Both inside and outside our nation’s courts, this week witnessed an important variety of law enforcement events—including the criminal sentencing of a violent January 6 rioter-insurrectionist, the indictment of officers who falsified a search warrant leading to devastatingly tragic results, the imposition of civil monetary judgments on a notorious figure who falsely stated that one of our nation’s most catastrophic school shootings was fabricated, and the rejection by the residents of one of our Midwestern states of a constitutional amendment that would have outlawed abortion services. Our world, our nation, and our state is also rightly focused on the events of August 5, 2012—when a white supremacist gunman killed seven people and injured many others at the Oak Creek Gurdwara; that Wisconsin-based event remains one of the major civil and human rights tragedies in our country’s nearly 250-year history. How might we best digest and sensibly understand these important developments in the justice-related pursuits of our time—while also learning critical lessons and even taking inspiration for change from the profound sacrifices and enduring losses of our fellow citizens?

The Constitutional Rights and Limits of Free Speech in the Classroom—For Teachers

James Santelle — Sat, 30 Jul 2022 14:00:53 +0000

Resuming a two-broadcast arc of discussions about the application of the First Amendment to public academic settings, a proper examination of the rights and responsibilities of America’s instructors is revealed to be both uncertain and evolving. The United States Supreme Court has recognized that public school administrators may lawfully place some balanced restrictions on student behavior—and perhaps even more limitations on the teachers who guide their in-classroom learning (based on their contractual relationships with the districts that employ them). Even so, an iconic Justice affirmed years ago that teachers, like their students, do not surrender their constitutional rights at schoolhouse gate—and the High Court has recently upheld that foundational principle in a ruling on the religious liberties of a praying coach. As America plans for the re-opening of grade school, secondary school, and university/college campuses nationwide, what is the state of the law in academics—and what does that mean for attempts to ban books or prohibit access to instructional materials in some parts of our country?

The Significant Justice News of the Week—and Consideration of First Amendment Rights in Schools

James Santelle — Sat, 23 Jul 2022 14:00:09 +0000

Likely reflecting the predominant public reactions to recent decisions of the United States Supreme Court in the areas of privacy/abortion rights, firearms access and use, and environmental enforcement options, nationwide polling reflects a notable diminution in respect for the High Court. Among other judicial actions this week, a federal court stopped the executive branch from implementing more humane standards for the arrest and deportation of immigrants while a jury in another found a former senior White House advisor guilty of contempt of Congress. All of this happens as our nation’s students (and their parents and family members) anticipate a return to classrooms—where the First Amendment law and judicial interpretation of freedom of expression remains scattered and unpredictable. What are the consequences of decisions made by America’s judges—including a western State’s initiative to award civil damages to private parties who identify violators of its prohibition on assault and other types of highly violent weapons? And what standards might reasonably guide students inclined to express their views—and publish newspaper articles—about these and other challenging topics of the day?

The History, the Effect, and the Judicial Diminution of the Voting Rights Act

James Santelle — Sat, 16 Jul 2022 14:00:03 +0000

In its next term, the United States Supreme Court will be addressing the legitimacy of an obscure and unfounded theory that only state legislatures—and not courts—are empowered to resolve election challenges; the anticipated return of the High Court to voting issues prompts a review and revisiting of one of the central pieces of civil rights legislation in our nation’s history. Intended to remedy generations of racial and other forms of discrimination in polling, the Voting Rights Act clearly established prohibitions on attempts to disenfranchise Americans of color; in its several implementation aspects, the law also vested in the United States Department of Justice unequivocal rights to prohibit changes in state and local laws denying Blacks and other minorities access to the polls—and to petition the courts to remedy discriminatory protocols and unfair practices. In two major decisions of recent years, the Justices have effectively eliminated both of those remedial devices to address voting violations. What do those rulings mean for the present and the future, and what might the United States Congress do to remedy legislatively the elimination of these key provisions of the Voting Rights Act?

The Critically Important, Substantive Diverse Recent Decisions of the Supreme Court

James Santelle — Sat, 09 Jul 2022 14:00:54 +0000

Not to be diminished in significance by recent opinions on privacy rights and firearms, the High Court has also been exceptionally focused on other topics that are equally meaningful to the lives and livelihoods of Americans in the 21st Century. Among the more than 60 decisions issued in this term, the Justices limited the authority of the chief executive to impose environmental standards on polluting companies, affirmed the presidential prerogative to permit asylum-seekers to remain in the United States while their applications are pending, upheld the rights of death row inmates to engage with their religious leaders prior to execution and even to challenge the means by which they are put to death, promoted religious liberty by permitting a high school coach to prayer with his team on the playing field and supporting the options of parents to receive state tax monies to support the religious education of their children, and found that so-called Miranda rights do not permit a former defendant to sue for a violation of them. In a series of additional cases on college admissions, LGBTQIA rights, wetlands protections, and voting oversight, the Court has already begun to fill its docket for the next term. What do all of these cases mean for our nation, and where is the Court likely to go in addressing the present and coming challenges of our time?

The Historic Judicial Rulings on Abortion and Firearms

James Santelle — Sat, 25 Jun 2022 14:00:26 +0000

As discussed and predicted in the first two broadcasts, the United States Supreme Court this week changed the course not only of American jurisprudence but also the legal standards for the conduct and behavior our nation’s residents: In its dramatic reversal of nearly a half-century of legal tradition, the High Court found that the Constitution does not establish a right to abortion and related reproductive rights, effectively returning those critically important issues to the States. And in its other significant ruling, the Justices expanded the scope of the Second Amendment to permit the carry and presumably the use of guns beyond the home and into public places of common gathering. What do the written opinions in these two colossal rulings actually say, how will they likely affect practices and policies on abortion and guns in communities nationwide, and what did the dissenting Justices voice in stark opposition to the decisions of this historic week?

The Court’s Questions on Environment, Religion, and Immigration—and the January 6 Committee’s Second Public Hearing

James Santelle — Sat, 18 Jun 2022 14:00:10 +0000

The current docket of the United States Supreme Court also features thorny and controversial issues in the areas of climate change, religious liberty, and asylum seekers. Among those is the power of the executive branch to impose restrictions on the emission of so-called greenhouse gases to address our environmental problems, the meaning and import of the First Amendment’s separation of church and state in the financial support of schools and the conduct of teacher-coaches, and the authority of our federal government to impose conditions on the movement into and presence in the United States of refugees fleeing persecution and other human rights violations in their home countries. What are the sources (factual and legal) of these significant constitutional and statutory cases and what are the actual implications of decisions by the High Court on the established roles of the Congress and the White House in exercising their delegated governing powers?

The Judicial Development and Enforcement of Privacy Rights

James Santelle — Sat, 11 Jun 2022 14:00:32 +0000

Beginning with its first hints at a constitutional right to privacy in the 1920s and continuing through its full and formal embrace of such a personal prerogative in the mid-1960s, the United States Supreme Court has identified from various sources in our founding document what one justice described as “the right to an inviolate personality” and “the right to be left alone.” That seminal doctrine has been invoked by our judiciary to ensure privacy protections in many, important areas of contemporary American life and livelihood for over a century—including but not limited to access to reproductive medical services and, in particular, abortion. What are the procedural and factual trappings of the case now before the High Court that will likely reverse a 49-year-old civil rights tradition? And what are the consequences of such a ruling for residents in various states nationwide (including potential impacts on other, equally well-settled privacy interests)?

The Actual Second Amendment Rights to Firearms

James Santelle — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 14:00:01 +0000

Thirteen years ago, the United States Supreme Court said for the first time in American history that the Constitution establishes a personal right to gun ownership in the home for defensive purposes. Soon in its present term the High Court will be issuing its next, major opinion interpreting the meaning and import of the Second Amendment: The Justices are wrestling with the constitutionality of a New York State law requiring that applicants to carry firearms in public describe their particularized need to do so. Will they uphold the legality of that process intended to promote community safety and security or will they expand protected gun rights beyond private residences to public-community venues (as the oral arguments of late last year reflect)? And what policy options remain for federal and state legislatures attempting to address our nation’s gun violence challenges? [This inaugural broadcast also includes a discussion of the intended purpose and planned focus of the program—along with an explanation of its curious title!]